Guest essay by David Archibald
The following is a series of graphs that depict the current and past state of the sun.
Figure 1: Solar Cycle 24 relative to the Dalton Minimum
Solar Cycle 24 had almost the same shape as Solar Cycle 5, the first half of the Dalton Minimum, up to about six months ago and is now a lot stronger.
Figure 2: Monthly F10.7 Flux 1948 to 2014
The strength of the current solar cycle is confirmed by the F10.7 which is not subject to observer bias. Solar Cycle 24 is now five and a half years long.
Figure 3: Ap Index 1932 to 2014
The biggest change in solar activity for the current cycle is in magnetic activity which is now at the floor of activity for the period 1932 to 2007.
Figure 4: Heliospheric Tilt Angle 1976 to 2014
Peak of the solar cycle has occurred when heliospheric tilt angle reaches 73°. For Solar Cycle 24, this was in February 2013. It is now heading down to the 24/25 minimum.
Figure 5: Interplanetary Magnetic Field 1966 to 2014
This looks like a more muted version of the Ap Index. The main difference between them is that the IMF was a lot flatter over Solar Cycle 20 than the Ap Index.
Figure 6: Sum of Solar Polar Field Strengths 1976 to 2014
This is one of the more important graphs in the set in that it can have predictive ability. The SODA index pioneered by Schatten is based on the sum of the poloidal fields and the F10.7 flux. This methodology starts getting accurate for the next cycle a few years before solar minimum. If Solar Cycle 24 proves to be twelve years long, as Solar Cycle 5 was, then the SODA index may start being accurate from about 2016. In terms of solar cycle length, the only estimate in the public domain is from extrapolating Hathaway’s diagram off his image. Hathaway’s curve-fitting suggests that the Solar Cyce 24/25 minimum will be in late 2022. If so, Solar Cycle 24 will be thirteen years long, a little longer than Solar Cycle 23.
It seems that Livingstone and Penn’s estimate of Solar Cycle 25 amplitude of 7 remains the only one in the public domain. The reputational risk for solar physicists in making a prediction remains too great.
David Archibald, a Visiting Fellow at the Institute of World Politics in Washington, D.C., is the author of Twilight of Abundance: Why Life in the 21st Century Will Be Nasty, Brutish, and Short (Regnery, 2014).
This graph reproducing the AMO has its root in the solar magnetic cycle. Since than I’ve been trying to find out if there is any other way of reproducing the AMO, in case the science for some reason agrees with the ‘solar output’ variability has no influence.
Let’s assume that solar sunspot and magnetic activity are entirely random (no sunspot or Hale cycles), but activity is still present say at an averaged level experienced during the 24 cycles of the known observations.
Question is: Would the AMO exist? In such a case could the sun still be the driver of the multidecadal temperature variability? After more than a year of deliberation, I finally concluded yes; and it is possible to demonstrate it with the existing data.
Those who have bet the house on cagw will be keeping a nervous eye on this.
The recent perkiness of cycle 24 may explain why there hasn’t been an actual cooling response in the atmosphere as yet.
Atmospheric cooling seems to start following the peak of the first lower cycle due to oceanic thermal inertia.
In the meantime, ocean heat content is no longer rising (may be falling) and El Ninos seem to be weakening.
We need to see some cooling, not just non-warming, and soon.
MattN says:
“We need to see some cooling, not just non-warming, and soon.”
Unfortunately cooling is the last thing we need, although it is the more likely scenario. Our planet is always healthier when warmer, not when cooler.
It will be interesting to read the remainder of David Evans findings. These graphs show us (possibly) why we have the hiatus. If his work looks promising, it will go along way into creating models that can actually be of use for trending temperatures.
This would not on its own be very convincing without more cases. However 10,000 years of solar proxies show that there is a cycle averaging 208 years. Sunspot numbers for the last few hundred years show a maximum correlation at about 211 years.
MattN, speak for yourself, mate! Here in England we were looking forward to warming. We are very disappointed. Sure, the BBC THINK it has warmed, but not so much, and everyone at the BBC is stark raving mad anyway. Sod cooling, we were hoping for a return to the summer of ’75 and ’76 here.
I agree with MattN, cooling would be disastrous for the health and welfare of the world’s people.
But I don’t think that Jantar meant the “world” needs cooling. I think he meant that to be plausible, the solar-variation theory of climate needs cooling. Otherwise, the theory may fail to explain the observed global climate.
The Ghost Of Big Jim Cooley says:
June 18, 2014 at 4:38 am
Sod cooling, we were hoping for a return to the summer of ’75 and ’76 here.
Last week (on the hottest day of the year so far) I emailed TonyB that based on the CET’s daily maximum temperatures, that the forthcoming summer will be cooler than the 20 year average. I did similar estimate for the last winter being warmer than the average, that proved correct, this time we’ll see
I would prefer cooling at the expense of lesser prosperity, in return for freedom from the current oppresive warmist agenda.
However, I’m not so naive as to think that anything would change much politically in either scenario. Let’s face it: warm or cold, the political elite will twist things either way to convince the useful idiots that whatever happens’s it’s worse than we thought and all our fault, and make us pay. This is, sadly, the nature of the beast.
You might want to rethink that DavidUK. If cooling begins they will claim credit and say we have to double down to make sure we save the world. Never underestimate the power of power and money.
Hathaway’s curve-fitting suggests that the Solar Cyce 24/25 minimum will be in late 2022. …It seems that Livingstone and Penn’s estimate of Solar Cycle 25 amplitude of 7 remains the only one in the public domain.
Dr. Archibald,
Do you have a number for SSN25?
Hathaway rejected as impossible my SC24 extrapolation of around 80 for SC24, at the time he was predicting ‘the strongest cycle ever’.
I would estimate that Livingstone and Penn’s estimate of 7 for SC25 is far too low, and would go for a symbolic SSN=25 for the SC25.
Jantar says:
June 18, 2014 at 4:32 am
MattN says:
“We need to see some cooling, not just non-warming, and soon.”
Unfortunately cooling is the last thing we need, although it is the more likely scenario. Our planet is always healthier when warmer, not when cooler.
==============================================================
Agreed – but were the real world to put a stake through the heart if CAGW with some real cooling, that would be a good thing in itself. Then perhaps we can start looking at adaptation to climate change rather than impossible mitigation (aka economic misery).
@The Ghost Of Big Jim Cooley Ah, ’75 and ’76!!! Best sweet whites [Sauternes, Barsac etc] in living memory, another reason to pray for AGW.
We can always count on David A to bend the truth a bit. His Figure 1 does NOT show the SIDC sunspot numbers [but rather the – too low – Group Sunspot Number]:
http://www.leif.org/research/DavidA20.png
For those of us new to WUWT and the ongoing debates it is depressing to read here the sober and erudite contradictions of some of the more extremist alarms about AGW and then look around and see that the politicians and media are still operating with the same closed mind.
Perhaps a more focussed approach is needed.
There is in the UK , and also it seems in the US, a consensus (perhaps not 97% but close) that Hilary Clinton is the next US president . Her husband is still one of the most popular and successful of recent Presidents , partly because he was lucky in that there were fewer terrorist outrages and financial crises in his 8 years , but , to his credit , because he realised that he needed to concentrate on the aspirations of the average low – middle clas working family.
Knowing that I expect that she will be open to listening to the sceptics arguement on climate change if the Obama policies lead to a significant financial or employment loss to most US families.
She will not be able to disentangle from Obama’s ploicies until after the election because she needs the Democratic party machine , but afterwards perhaps a briefing session could be arranged with the best well known of WUWT contributers to put the case for a reduction in some of the sillier of the climate change proposals in the US and abroad.
She gives the impression of being a formidably intelligent woman and a change if not in mind , but at least in emphasis could have a global catalytic effect.
Reblogged this on The Next Grand Minimum and commented:
“It seems that Livingstone and Penn’s estimate of Solar Cycle 25 amplitude of 7 remains the only one in the public domain. The reputational risk for solar physicists in making a prediction remains too great.”
mikewaite says:
June 18, 2014 at 5:51 am
“She gives the impression of being a formidably intelligent woman …”
Make no mistake about Hillary she is an arrogant, progressive liberal. It’s just that by comparison Obama makes her look reasonable. Now Bill, having good political sense, compromised with the Republicans and moved things to the center, thus his legacy for being a good President.
David had previously stated his belief that solar cycle 24 would be at least 17 years long, now he mentions it being, perhaps, 13 years long. David, have you changed your prediction?
mikewaite says:
June 18, 2014 at 5:51 am
Shouldn’t you also have included “I am Hillary Clinton and I approve of this message”?
Bill Clinton is only popular due to the continual promoting by the media. The media only promotes liberalism/progressivism. Conservative or limited governmental concepts are demeaned and attacked. Reagan was the only one to overcome the onslaught of attacks from the media and remained popular. The media needs to do its job, remain neutral and keep the leaders in line of both parties. No politician should ever be defended or popularized by the media. The media needs to stick to reporting the news. Climate change is another idea of the left that is being promoted by the media lap dogs to control/minipulate the public into giving more power to the government. It is all by design to grow government and change the world towards progressive ideals.
@mikewaite
You comment about the luck of the former President Clinton is quite correct but slightly misses the target. It is a very common oversight in the media and among many voters not to acknowledge the fact that the Asian financial crisis was a late stage economic cycle stimulant for the U.S. economy by prompting Fed rate cuts in sympathy with the Asian countries for coordinated policy action and a late cycle plunge in commodity costs like oil (at $20) that act like cocaine in the veins of U.S. consumers. All of that extended the expansion rather unnaturally. The earlier Clinton moves consisted of a huge tax increase that lost the majority in the House for the first time in modern history and some moderation on spending and (or) with the benefits of post-Cold War savings in the military budget.
mikewaite says:
“There is in the UK , and also it seems in the US, a consensus (perhaps not 97% but close) that Hilary Clinton is the next US president .”
That claim to consensus is as bogus as the 97% of climate scientist claim.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2014/06/17/5_reasons_hillary_wont_run_123015.html
MattN, not sure if that’s what you meant, but how about some gentle unprecedented unchanged-ness?
That surely has to be the worst possible scenario for doomsters and charlatans predicting the end of times. [It also seems to correlate fairly well with what is often termed peace and prosperity.]