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.
Pamela Gray says:
August 22, 2014 at 7:25 pm
“Jim, having been well schooled in research methods and proper statistical analysis,”
So have I, bottom line, peer review has little meaning anymore, if it ever did, so why reference it as proof of validity.
Jim, unless you are unable to bring adequate critique to methods, then yes peer review is your only source of validity. Which is a poorman’s fallback position. As for unpublished or nonpeer reviewed work, buyer beware. We harangued the previous IPCC reports for using such papers. However, with regard to peer reviewed papers, I could not care less about who did the peer review or what methods they used to inform my critique. I use methods critique I learned from taking two graduate level classes in research critique, in addition to graduate level classes in research design, as well as engaging in and publishing my own research, through two masters programs.
If inadequacies show, I have learned to take the paper with a grain of salt, which is the majority of papers related to intrinsic factors. Most CO2 modeling papers I have read I unfortunately have to dismiss. Most solar-linked climate papers I have also had to dismiss. Papers that have not been submitted and accepted for journal publication get even more of my scrutiny. And in general, do not fair well at all.
A case in point. The What Works Clearing House (http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/default.aspx) reviews educational research to help practitioners choose reliable and valid methods and curriculum in educational settings. They review published research and then write these reviews for public consumption. There are precious few published papers that meet their standards, meaning that the methods used place results at risk of being unreliable and/or invalid. They publish a handbook (see link below) on their methods of critique. Although I am only a fraction percent as thorough as they are, it does reflect the kind of review we should be using when digesting both published and unpublished papers. I dare say that many commenters here do not use adequate research critique.
http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/DocumentSum.aspx?sid=19
Pamela Gray says:
The speech was not necessary. I have not questioned your capabilities only your need to reference “peer review” as if it were a form of validation, which it is not. And from I can see, and have seen over the years, neither is “publication” in “appropriate” journals. Also, I can tell you for certain from many years of experience that anyone, and I do mean anyone, with the time and money can obtain a PHD behind their name, or an MD for that matter.
The reverse happens during inter-glacials and warm DO events, the Arctic warms during weaker solar conditions because of increased poleward ocean transport. During Glacial Maxima, the oceanic flow to the Arctic is halted, probably due to extended ice shelves, and its temperature then moves in unison with the mid latitudes and south pole, instead of in opposition.