Lund University have published a reconstruction of solar activity vs snow accumulation in Greenland, which indicates a strong correlation between solar minima and a colder climate.
‘The study shows an unexpected link between solar activity and climate change,’ Dr Muscheler said in a press release.
‘It shows both that changes in solar activity are nothing new and that solar activity influences the climate, especially on a regional level. ‘Understanding these processes helps us to better forecast the climate in certain regions.’
According to the study abstract;
http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ngeo2225.html
“We find that during the Last Glacial Maximum, solar minima correlate with more negative δ18O values of ice and are accompanied by increased snow accumulation and sea-salt input over central Greenland. We suggest that solar minima could have induced changes in the stratosphere that favour the development of high-pressure blocking systems located to the south of Greenland, as has been found in observations and model simulations for recent climate9, 10. We conclude that the mechanism behind solar forcing of regional climate change may have been similar under both modern and Last Glacial Maximum climate conditions.”
Dr. Muscheler emphasised that he does not believe that the sun is the main factor driving current global warming – but he does believe that climate modellers will have to pay more attention to the influence of the sun on climate change.
However, he warned that the sun was not the only factor in causing climate change.
‘Climate skeptics like to say sun is causing more global warming than we think but I don’t think so.
‘What our paper shows is we need to include all processes – greenhouses, the sun and so on, especially for local climates which is important of course.
Persistent link between solar activity and Greenland climate during the Last Glacial Maximum
Florian Adolphi,Raimund Muscheler,Anders Svensson,Ala Aldahan,Göran Possnert,Jürg Beer,Jesper Sjolte,Svante Björck,Katja Matthes& Rémi Thiéblemont
Nature Geoscience (2014) doi:10.1038/ngeo2225
Changes in solar activity have previously been proposed to cause decadal- to millennial-scale fluctuations in both the modern and Holocene climates1. Direct observational records of solar activity, such as sunspot numbers, exist for only the past few hundred years, so solar variability for earlier periods is typically reconstructed from measurements of cosmogenic radionuclides such as 10Be and 14C from ice cores and tree rings2, 3. Here we present a high-resolution 10Be record from the ice core collected from central Greenland by the Greenland Ice Core Project (GRIP). The record spans from 22,500 to 10,000 years ago, and is based on new and compiled data4, 5, 6. Using 14C records7, 8 to control for climate-related influences on 10Be deposition, we reconstruct centennial changes in solar activity. We find that during the Last Glacial Maximum, solar minima correlate with more negative δ18O values of ice and are accompanied by increased snow accumulation and sea-salt input over central Greenland. We suggest that solar minima could have induced changes in the stratosphere that favour the development of high-pressure blocking systems located to the south of Greenland, as has been found in observations and model simulations for recent climate9, 10. We conclude that the mechanism behind solar forcing of regional climate change may have been similar under both modern and Last Glacial Maximum climate conditions.
a, δ18O variations as recorded in the GRIP ice core21. b, 10Be concentrations from the GRIP (red: this study, black: refs 4, 5) and GISP2 (ref. 6; blue) ice cores. c, 10Be fluxes using accumulation rates inferred from the GICC05 age
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
That only makes sense, everything else in our universe has multiple parts, why shouldn’t climate change? Besides, it makes sense that the sun affects climate change.
This is not news to anyone who has been paying the least bit of attention.
Seriously? The Sun influences the climate?
No, that can not be. It must be humans for sure. The science said so!
‘The study shows an unexpected link between solar activity and climate change,’ Dr Muscheler said in a press release.
Duh……..
Now that IS a DOH moment…Only the myopic CAGW flock could find this “surprising” …
Is the Bank of Climate Scientists beginning to hedge?
Unexpected by whom?
How can the development of high-pressure blocking systems to the south of Greenland not affect other regions?
Well, who’d have thunk it? I wonder how they’ll try and spin this out to meaning nothing?
Time to make like a tree…
From the Gizmag report:
http://www.gizmag.com/suns-activity-influences-natural-climate-change/33409/
“Reduced solar activity could lead to colder winters in Northern Europe. This is because the sun’s UV radiation affects the atmospheric circulation. Interestingly, the same processes lead to warmer winters in Greenland, with greater snowfall and more storms.” said Dr said Raimund Muscheler, Lecturer in Quaternary Geology at Lund University. “The study also shows that the various solar processes need to be included in climate models in order to better predict future global and regional climate change.”
Further to their theory, the researchers believe that changes in wind patterns resulted from alterations in received temperatures, suggesting that a top-down solar influence increased oceanic feedback and may have acted as an additional amplification mechanism. In other words, variations in solar radiation affected the atmosphere, altering the barometric pressure which, in turn, changed the prevailing wind patterns in the upper atmosphere.
In atmospheric physics parlance, these winds are known as eddy-driven jets and a high-pressure increase over the North Atlantic (as evidenced in today’s climate) is often accompanied by a displacement to the south of these winds. This results in a negative effect on the North Atlantic Oscillation (the atmospheric pressure difference at sea level between the Icelandic low and the Azores high), which can produce colder winds and higher levels of snowfall.
As a result, the alteration of these winds changes the way in which heat is exchanged between the oceans and the atmosphere. In the Lund University reconstruction and modeling, evidence is shown that this particular effect was being exacerbated by the amount of solar energy striking the Earth’s atmosphere in direct relationship to the activity of the sun.
‘Climate skeptics like to say sun is causing more global warming than we think but I don’t think so.’
Classic. The results agree *exactly* with what climate skeptics have been saying for years, but he feels the need of producing such a apologistic remark just to placate the wrath of warmists.
I wonder how much time we will have to disguise scientific results with political makeup like that. Perhaps ten years? Twenty? Perhaps until all warmists retire or die?
How can the Sun possibly influence climate on Earth, it’s absurd. It’s carbon dioxide surely: well that’s what the models and my Climate Catechism say.
Shhh, nobody tell Willis.
This is unsettling science, to be sure.
But, but, that would mean that the “Furnace” has something to do with how hot or cold the “House” is getting?!?
Need I say…/sarc?
Willis’s point has to do with the regular sunspot cycle, not long-term solar activity. His position is still safe.
sturgishooper August 20, 2014 at 1:39 pm
How can the development of high-pressure blocking systems to the south of Greenland not affect other regions?
cuz their not butterflies – /sarc
” Dr. Muscheler emphasised that he does not believe that the sun is the main factor driving current global warming ”
Without any explanation for past climate change in the recent past as per the IPCC climate chart showing no increase in co2 during those periods of change… what does he BELIEVE? Maybe he belongs to ” Save the Climate Grant Money” organization. Heretics of any kind are not allowed (aloud). Does that mean that there was change or no change? How could there have possibly been change without an increase or decrease in co2? Haven’t the IPCC and AGW in general stated with alarm that additional inputs of co2 control the temperature on this planet? And soon a Tipping point WILL be reached if we don’t take action now (going on 18 +/- 5 years now, depending)? These kind of studies just morph the religious aspect of AGW into something that will not be resemble anything of the original someday, / sarcasm
I don’t think the results of this study will pass muster with Dr. Leif. There is no explanatory mechanism. The results can be a nice coincidence but dont illuminate any causation. Just like an increase in ice cream sales in the summer is not the cause of higher temps in July-Sept.
archonix said:
August 20, 2014 at 1:40 pm
Well, who’d have thunk it? I wonder how they’ll try and spin this out to meaning nothing?
Time to make like a tree…
————
and bark? oak-eedoke… bough wow!
(I know, I’m Mark and two CATS – but I’m branching out)
🙂
This is “surprising” only to those whose jobs depended on them publishing “unsurprising” articles that supported CAGW.
Luckily for us Leif has adjusted all the solar data to prove that there is no link between solar activity and climate. So this has to be nonsense…right?
dp says:
August 20, 2014 at 1:57 pm
Willis’ position not only isn’t still safe. It never was. He claims never to have seen any evidence of any solar influence on climate, to include the ~11 and 22-year cycles, not just SSN.
Have you actually read his posts on the subject and replies to comments?
JEyon says:
August 20, 2014 at 1:59 pm
IMO, the authors knew that their study would never see the light of day had they claimed a global effect rather than just regional.
Remarkable, isn’t it, how the same “only regional” solar influences are found in every region of the planet?
http://www.researchgate.net/publication/228748235_Solar_influence_on_the_Indian_summer_monsoon_during_the_Holocene
“Climate skeptics like to say sun is causing more global warming than we think but I don’t think so.”
That’s pretty definitive: “more…than we think but I don’t think so.”