The solar data from the NOAA Space Weather prediction center has been posted, and like the global temperature, there isn’t much change. Sunspot numbers are down slightly, but still up from most of 2012/2013. The double peak looks more prominent.
Solar radio flux shows a similar double peak pattern.
And the Ap Magnetic index is down 6 units, and continues to bump along the bottom compared to the last solar cycle. The solar dynamo continues to be sluggish.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Has Leif made any comment on his earlier ‘welcome to solar max’ note?
But the sun has no effect on climate right?
What I’ve said: 65, perhaps heading TO a Dalton, but not a Dalton and certainly not heading into a Maunder. Not that 1 example of each is much of a statistically valid dataset to be certain, that’s settled, for sure ….
The climate catastrophists can sell books based on Ice-aggedon, also.
“Scientists now believe that the intensity of sunspot cycles is an indicator of the overall brightness of the sun, which changes on cycles of a century and does have an influence on climate. Research by Dr. Judith Lean, a solar physicist at U.S. Naval Research Laboratory in Washington, D.C. and colleagues noted a strong correlation between solar output and temperatures since 1610. ..a period during the “Little Ice Age”, from the 17th to early 18th centuries called the “Maunder Minimum,” was characterized by a Sun that was 0.25% dimmer than it is now. This change goes well beyond the 0.1% dimming ascribed to the 11-year sunspot cycle, so that a climate impact becomes much more probably. In addition, Lean assumes that the change in UV output from the Sun must have been 6 times larger than that of visible light (a fact which, if true, holds interesting implications for the history of the ozone layer).
Lean’s study found that “solar forcing may have contributed about half of the observed 0.55°C surface warming since 1860 and one third of the warming since 1970″. ”
Not according to Michael Mann though. According to his study 100% of the warming was caused by the hot air coming out from his mouth and a further 100% recorded on his graph from the methane proceeding from his backside.
Polar field is still hovering around zero, the SC24 max could be up to a year away.
james says:
April 8, 2014 at 3:10 pm
But the sun has no effect on climate right?
.
No.
None.
None at all.
Of course not.
A scurrilous suggestion.
Now concentrate on the worry at hand, stop looking over there.
Bloke down the pub says:
April 8, 2014 at 3:08 pm
Has Leif made any comment on his earlier ‘welcome to solar max’ note?
Solar max is here to stay for a while. My prediction of something in the 70s for the smoothed SSN still looks good. All the ‘experts’ here who were fishing for 60s or lower were certainly off the mark.
Leif Svalgaard,
If you read this thread, can you advise approximately when do you (and your past prediction associates) think you will make your prediction of cycle 25?
Will you make a cycle 25 prediction around the end of 2015 or start of 2016?
Eternally curious . . . : )
John
I am fascinated by the apparent “twin peak” of cycle 23 and 24. Is it due to phase shifting of two internal cycles, or phase differences between North and South Solar hemisphere?
Such solar data interesting no doubt but as anecdotal as one often inaccurate temperature min & max per day. It is certain that such data (>200 years versus ~ 4.5 billion years of history) that describing solar behavior & surface temperature data are both pitifully inadequate to describe the full range of chaotic behavior or draw conclusions about correlations.
Where uncertainty abounds, conclusions are suspect. What’s the rush to judgement good for ?
Unmentioned is that solar max for Cycle 24 is up to 73.2 and with higher activity over the last 6 months, it will go up again next month. lsvalgaard’s 2004 max prediction is looking remarkable!
The burst of solar southern hemisphere SS activity for the last 3 months has Dr David Hathaway’s cycle 24 prediction curve peak shifted rightward about 6-7 months from early 2013 (compare predict 2013/12 to 2014/4) to about August 2013. That will give a peak cycle 23 to peak cycle 24 an almost 13 year duration, while 22-23 peak to peak duration was about 10.2 years.
Cycles 23-24 are looking more like cycles 4-5, which 5 was the beginning of the Dalton minimum which lasted 35 years (cycles 5-7).
Leif you can bet that those who suggested figures
In the 60 s wont accept their fallibility.
When the solar activity increases again, so will the warming. THAT’S when the effects of carbon will kick in. Models will prove it.
John Whitman says:
April 8, 2014 at 3:53 pm
Will you make a cycle 25 prediction around the end of 2015 or start of 2016?
When the polar fields have reversed and the new polar fields are stable enough to show the annual variation. This usually happens three or four years before minimum, so sometimes after 2017 would be my guess.
Robert of Ottawa says:
April 8, 2014 at 3:57 pm
I am fascinated by the apparent “twin peak” of cycle 23 and 24. Is it due to phase shifting of two internal cycles, or phase differences between North and South Solar hemisphere?
Phase shift between North and South. Cycle 14 did the same: http://www.leif.org/research/SC14-24-Groups-Months.png
Joel O’Bryan says:
April 8, 2014 at 4:00 pm
Cycles 23-24 are looking more like cycles 4-5
The data for SC4 and 5 are so uncertain that any comparison is not worth much.
Doug Proctor wrote: “and certainly not heading into a Maunder.”
As you note 1 cycle is not anywhere close to a good indicator, but on the same token we really don’t know what the lead-in cycle (1635-1645) to the Maunder min (1645-1715) looked like by modern SSN methods since 1849. 1630 was still the very beginning of the telescope age and the early 1611-1650 solar observers were just learning what to count and their records are spotty. The SSN reconstructions from GCR proxies leading into 1645 are gross approximations at best.
Bottomline, the use of the word “certainty” (or its alternative form certainly) should be used with great caution in estimating future solar activity until the cycle is underway.
Steve O wrote: “Models will prove it.”
Humor and laughter are supposedly good for the heart. So Steve, Thanks for the ROFL episode!!!!
Steven Mosher says:
April 8, 2014 at 4:10 pm
Leif you can bet that those who suggested figures In the 60 s wont accept their fallibility.
People rarely do. My bet is that they will blame the sunspot counters for counting ‘specks’ that Rudolf Wolf would never have counted…
Q: BioBob wrote: What’s the rush to judgement good for ?
A: For the CAGW adherents, a “rush to judgement” (as in “its settled science so shut up”) is good for about $1Trillion+ from the industrialized countries over the next decade in direct transfer payments to the developing world and “green” energy projects. The indirect costs of reduced GDP growth are even far worse.
lsvalgaard April 8, 2014 at 4:15 pm
Phase shift between North and South. Cycle 14 did the same: http://www.leif.org/research/SC14-24-Groups-Months.png
I do not understand how there can be a magnetic moment without its opposite. A North without a South? Those flux lines must be really messed up, which means the currents in the plasma generating these fluxes are rushing around like turbulent water currents in the St. Lawrence River in the 1000 islands area.
Robert of Ottawa says:
April 8, 2014 at 4:37 pm
I do not understand how there can be a magnetic moment without its opposite. A North without a South?
Each sunspot is a collection of magnetic poles and their flux balances to a net of zero. The sunspot number [or the number of groups] is the number of such balanced collections, so the there is no problem with poles without ‘opposites’.
Joel O’Bryan sugested”
“Cycles 23-24 are looking more like cycles 4-5, which 5 was the beginning of the Dalton minimum which lasted 35 years (cycles 5-7)”
Cycles 5-7 don’t look much like Cycle 24. In fact, with Cycle 24’s burst of recent activity over the last 6 months is starting to look like something very different from previous cycles. It’s secondary peak is unusually high and will probably get higher next month:
See updated smoothed ISN as of April 1st here:
http://www.pbase.com/image/155157279/original.jpg
they do count specks which were not counted before
james says:
April 8, 2014 at 6:04 pm
they do count specks which were not counted before
As I predicted those people would say…