Guest essay by Eric Worrall
John Holdren, President Obama’s Science Advisor, once tried to reframe the climate debate in terms of his prediction of “global climate disruption”. Holdren stated at the time, that the term “global warming” is “a dangerous misnomer”.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/09/16/the-morphology-of-global-warming/
The question – does John Holdren believe that “global climate disruption” might actually lead to global cooling? Is this why Holdren is unhappy with the term “global warming”? Is this the advice Holdren is giving to President Obama?
Because there is some very circumstantial evidence that America, and other governments, may already be planning ahead, for the possibility that the world will cool.
Over the last few years, a number of major Australian newspapers have posted stories about the rising issue of large scale foreign buyouts of Australian farmland.
For example:-
The big question is – why? Why would opaque Chinese and American companies, some of are believed to be government backed, be so interested in large scale ownership of Australian farmland, land which the IPCC and Australian CSIRO predict will shortly become worthless desert?
The reason of course is the land will not shortly become worthless. The land may shortly become very valuable indeed.
Back in 2006, the Russian Academy of Science predicted imminent severe global cooling, beginning in 2012-2015, peaking at around 2055.
http://en.ria.ru/russia/20060825/53143686.html
Their prediction is based on the historic correlation between solar cycles and global climate.
Humans have been aware of the 11 year climate cycle since the dawn of history – several good years followed by several bad years is a fact of life. But there are also other, longer, more powerful cycles, which have an even larger impact on global climate.
One of them is the 200 year cycle. Every 200 years or so, solar activity falls to a sustained low. These long periods of low activity, known by the names of the scientists who discovered them – Maunder, Dalton, etc. – coincided historically with periods of extreme cold – plummeting global temperatures, crashing food production, and drastically shorter and less reliable growing seasons in the Northern Hemisphere.
At the peak of the cold periods, history records widespread famines and other disasters, such as the Year Without a Summer in 1816, a food production catastrophe triggered by low solar activity during the Dalton Minimum, combining with an unusually severe series of major volcanic eruptions. In the Year without a Summer, over vast areas, crops in the Northern hemisphere were destroyed by snow and frost in mid Summer, which created global famine and social unrest.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_Without_a_Summer
If the Russian Academy of Science is correct, the world is on the brink of a new cold period, which will start to bite in the next few years.
We could even see another year without a summer – there are several large volcanoes which are overdue for major eruptions, such as Katla in Iceland and Merapi in Indonesia. When they erupt, they shall add to downward pressure on global temperatures.
Given the risk, what could a nation whose grain belt is vulnerable to global cooling do, to protect its future food supply?
The obviously solution is to buy up farmland in another country.
A country which is warm enough, so that even if global temperatures fall significantly, the land they purchased would remain highly productive. A country with a strong tradition of respect for the rule of law. A country which would continue to respect the rule of law, even in the face of a global catastrophe.
A country like Australia.
===============================================================
Note: They key word in the title is “very speculative”, but I thought it was an interesting question. It may also simply be part of China’s economic expansion, which we have also witnessed in the USA with them buying up properties. – Anthony
And the actual absorption of thermal radiation.
http://www.ospo.noaa.gov/data/atmosphere/radbud/gs19_prd.gif
What is happening with the magnetic field of the Sun, no one remembers. This will be the main cause of climate change.
http://www.geomag.bgs.ac.uk/images/image022.jpg
China is buying Australian property because they have no decent banking system for the rich to use for savings. They choose Australia because we are a stable country, both politically and economically and the rule of law applies. It is not just farm land that they are buying but houses and units in urban areas. When China wants to stop this flow of wealth out of the country they will change the rules and part of the property bubble in Australia will burst.
Konrad says
Sea level UV is the right question, or rather below sea level. Our oceans are heated primarily by shorter frequencies penetrating to depth. UV-A still has a power of 10 w/m2 at a depth of 50m.
Henry says
Konrad,thanks for that comment. There are not too many of us who actually figured it all out.
Clearly, Leif does not get any UV on his skin, perhaps he is dark skinned? Perhaps he should come here in the SH? Anyway, I learned it is rather pointless talking to him.
From my own analysis of maximum temperatures – which I see as an excellent proxy to assess the amount of incoming energy- I was able to figure out the chain events that will lead to more global cooling in the future, on average, when compared to before the new millennium.
http://blogs.24.com/henryp/2013/02/21/henrys-pool-tables-on-global-warmingcooling/
(first table bottom, 4 results for the 4 periods)
There were some here on WUWT who suggested to cut up the 4 periods in different periods, e.g. into the exact lengths of Schwabe solar cycles, if somebody can give me here those exact 4 periods for the past 40 years?
On a similar subject – what will this year’s cold N American weather do to this years’ N American agricultural output.
Can Canada recover, plant late, and still produce the same crop yields? Or will there be a shortfall this year? Any farmers out there with an answer?
R
lsvalgaard
Except that Solanki [and others] are wrong about this. I have provided links to how we know this. Read them.
Sorry, I don’t buy it. You may be right that there is nothing special about 20th century solar activity – but sunspot count is a pretty good proxy for solar activity, and there is no doubt sunspot count was down in the Dalton minimum at least; 1790 – 1820. So for the first part of the 19th century at least, solar activity was well down on current levels.
(Graph of sunspot count vs TSI)
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/sidc-ssn/normalise/from:1970/plot/pmod/normalise/from:1970
Below is an integral of sunspot count vs global temperature I created a while ago. Regardless of what you think of my effort to demonstrate a correspondence between temperature and solar activity in this graph, one of the things this graph shows is that sunspot count during the 20th century was significantly higher than in the 19th century.
http://woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1850/mean:50/normalise/plot/sidc-ssn/from:1850/mean:50/offset:-40/integral/normalise
lsvalgaard
Just had another look at your composite graph – that shows pretty much what I just stated. The only issue is whether the 20th century was special compared to previous centuries. I’m happy to defer to your expertise on that one.
I wonder why my comment is in moderation
Henry@Eric
Eric, do I understand correctly that you wrote this article? I am just asking to make sure.
A natural consequence of global cooling, if it continues,
(and I explained here why I think it will continue,
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/04/05/an-intriguing-mystery-and-a-very-speculative-theory/#comment-1606834 )
is a small (?) shift of cloud formation and precipitation, more towards the equator, on average.
Whilst maximum and average temperatures will still be dropping (until 2038), average temperature around the equator remains more or less unchanged, largely due to more condensation energy coming free.
At the higher latitudes >[40] it will become progressively drier, from now onward, possibly even warmer during the day, ultimately culminating in a big drought period similar to the dust bowl drought 1932-1939. My various calculations all bring me to believe that this main drought period on the Great Plains will be from 2021-2028. It looks like we have only 7 “fat” years left…..
Obviously exchanging >[latitude] land for <[latitude] land seems like a good deal to me,
in fact, I believe the survival of 7 billion people may depend on it.
@ren
there was a scissor graph of the sun’s magnetic field strengths (both poles)
I cannot find it here anymore?
I wonder if Leif took it away from us?
Why do you think Russia is after the “bread basket” Ukraine?
I’d be a bit wary of attributing Chinese investment in land to any motives other than that land is the only investment worth a damn when push comes to shove.
I’m getting a warning on w/Windows 7 on Firefox 28.0 that WUWT can’t be “authenticated” — an invalid certificate and possibly the site being “impersonated”. First time this has happened. Checked for viruses & spyware — nothing detected. Cleared internet cache & all history but got it again. Prb’ly on my side if no one else is seeing it, but concerning.
If the Chinese are buying farms in Australia, the reason is to make money. But I do like conspiracy theories. Although I’m a little suspicious of the Russian Academy of Sciences right now.
I am sure the people of Galveston disagree. Galvaston was destroyed in the year 1900 when CO2 levels were low. The town never managed to regain it’s positions as a leading US boom town.
Holdren, just like Obama is an activist. You can’t have a sane dialogue with activists.
They execute “Agenda’s”.
We can’t afford a Nation like the US to be ruled by a bunch of idiots with an Agenda.
I can’t say it more direct.
Just kick those idiots out of office before they inflict more damage to the US, the World and our populations.
HenryP
Henry@Eric
Eric, do I understand correctly that you wrote this article? I am just asking to make sure.
Yes.
Obviously exchanging >[latitude] land for <[latitude] land seems like a good deal to me,
in fact, I believe the survival of 7 billion people may depend on it.
The land will be worked regardless of who owns it – especially if there are shortages elsewhere. But the owner of the land controls to whom they sell the produce.
There is also some unpleasantness on the home front – farmers are being told repeatedly that conditions will get worse. Bankers and insurers are potentially being influenced by predictions of worsening conditions. There has even been a suggestion that farmers on more marginal land should be discouraged from continuing, because predicted climate change will destroy the workability of the land.
http://www.smh.com.au/comment/time-to-sell-the-farm-20140218-32wyj.html
If Aussie farmers are being encouraged to sell at rock bottom prices, due to “official” assurances that there is no hope for the future, and people with different information are buying, then someone IMO is gaining an unfair advantage.
While others invade to get rich china buys strategic assets and political submission follows e.g this winter cameron sold uk foreign policy and was publicly humiliated in the process in the Chinese press that called the uk economy nothing but a theme park that was ok for tourists. Uk F.O now says nothing on tibet, taiwan, japanese islands
HenryP says:
@ren
there was a scissor graph of the sun’s magnetic field strengths (both poles)
I cannot find it here anymore?
Please links. Are also historical data cycles.
http://www.solen.info/solar/polarfields/polar.html
http://www.solen.info/solar/
Eric Worrall says:
April 6, 2014 at 3:20 am
Below is an integral of sunspot count vs global temperature I created a while ago.
Ah, yes, this sort of thing seems to be popular. Here is my version:
http://www.leif.org/research/SSN-Integral.png
Awww some of you have gotten so gosh darned stuffy. It’s a fascinating weekend post and its occasionally fun to swoon over doom. Just consider it a palette cleanser before we dig into another week of liberal warmer moonbat madness
lsvalgaard says:
April 5, 2014 at 9:18 am
… http://www.leif.org/research/Abdussa3.png
TSI has not declined as predicted as the thin blue curve shows (after allowance for the 4.8 W/m2 offset the older dataset had).
The graph shows TSI going from 1366 to 1360 W/m2. That’s about 1/2% and should result in a decrease in the planet’s temperature of about 1/10% or about 0.3° C. So, why does anyone care about TSI?
@sherry
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1927/to:2015/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:2002/to:2015/trend/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:1987/to:2015/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:2002/to:2015/trend/plot/rss/from:1987/to:2015/plot/rss/from:2002/to:2015/trend/plot/hadsst2gl/from:1987/to:2015/plot/hadsst2gl/from:2002/to:2015/trend/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1960/to:1990/trend/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:1987/to:2002/trend/plot/hadsst2gl/from:1987/to:2002/trend/plot/rss/from:1987/to:2002/trend/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1930/to:1960/trend
unfortunately,
global cooling will not be so much fun as global warming
commieBob says:
April 6, 2014 at 8:25 am
The graph shows TSI going from 1366 to 1360 W/m2. That’s about 1/2% and should result in a decrease in the planet’s temperature of about 1/10% or about 0.3° C. So, why does anyone care about TSI?
Because TSI is where the energy is. Now, people come up with all kinds of ‘excuses’, like there is a seven-fold amplification ‘feedback’, like there is a small portion of TSI that has an enormous effect, like it is the magnetic field, cosmic rays, aliens, etc, anything to avoid admitting that solar activity has not been observed to have a significant effect on the climate. I wish it had; that would increase the relevance of my research and funding in a big way…
ren says
http://www.solen.info/solar/polarfields/polar.html
Henry says
Thanks. That was the one I was looking for.
Knowing the distribution of the pattern of warming that is coming, I predict that the field strengths of both poles (of the sun) will hover a bit around zero or close to zero for the next two years, and then it will all move back, so that the next 22 years (from 2016-2038 ) will mirror the scissors from the past 22 years, i.e. from 1994-2016. After that, increasing field strengths will occur again, as per the same mirror, going further back in time.
So, it seems to me that global cooling can be associated with generally lower field strengths, compared to the global warming period (until 1995).
Of course, that is just my opinion.
I wonder if it is the (lower) field strengths that is affecting the reactions TOA, that makes the ozone, peroxides and nitrogenous oxides lying at the TOA?
HenryP
But I think that Vukcevic is right. This cycle of 208 years.
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/PF-latest.gif
http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/images/Zurich_Color_Small.jpg