Claim: low solar activity will melt Greenland's ice faster

“The new research also suggests weak solar activity, like the sun is currently experiencing, could slowly fire up the ocean circulation mechanism, increasing the amount of warm water and air flowing to Greenland.”
New? renewed warm air advections along eastern Greenland is a consequence of cooler denser polar air masses expulsion -see Leroux-, hardly New…

I am presenting a prolonged deep solar minimum possible climate mechanism which suggest the opposite of what they are trying to convey. This makes much more sense then their theory.
I further suggest prolonged solar minimums if deep enough in magnitude and long enough in duration of time will not give the same climate result that typical solar minimums give when part of the 11 year rhythmic solar cycle which is what has taken place since the Dalton Solar Minimum ended around 1830.
Only maybe since post 2005 is the sun going to enter another type of a prolonged severe solar minimum period which will effect the climate in a completely different way then what the typical solar minimum periods do when the sun is in a more or less 11 year rhythmic sunspot cycle.
Perhaps a severe prolonged solar minimum period could translate to what is suggested below.
One last thought before I get to that is, (which these fools who wrote this article do not understand) is Climatic Thresholds are always present and only slight differences in the degree of magnitude change /duration of time in the item or items causing the climate forcing could make the difference between the climatic threshold being reached or not reached ,which in turn would make all the difference in the world of the x climate out come.
One solar climate mechanism/connection theory which has much merit in my opinion, is as follows:
A BRIEF OVERVIEW. At times of low solar irradiance the amounts of sea ice in the Nordic Sea increase, this ice is then driven south due to the atmospheric circulation (also due to weak solar conditions) creating a more northerly air flow in this area.(-NAO) This sea ice then melts in the Sub Polar Atlantic, releasing fresh water into the sub- polar Atlantic waters, which in turn impedes the formation of NADW, which slows down the thermohaline circulation causing warm air not to be brought up from the lower latitudes as far north as previous while in lessening amounts.
This perhaps can be one of the contributing solar/climate connection factors which brought about previous abrupt N.H. cool downs during the past.
This makes much sense to me.
NAO= NORTH ATLANTIC OSCILLATION
NADW= NORTH ATLANTIC DEEP WATER
To elaborate on the above, when the sun enters a prolonged solar minimum condition an overall reduction takes place in solar spectral irradiance, namely in UV light (wavelengths less then 400 nm). The shorter the wavelength, the MUCH greater the reduction.
UV light reduction likely will cause ocean heat content and ocean surface temperatures to drop, due to the fact that UV light in the range of 280 nm-400nm penetrates the ocean surface to depths of 50-100 meters. A reduction in UV (ultra violet) light then should have a profound effect on the amount of energy entering the ocean surface waters from the sun extending down to 50-100 meters in depth, resulting in cooler ocean temperatures.
This ties into what was said in the above in that if ocean waters in high latitudes such as the Nordic Sea, were to be subject to cooling the result would be much more sea ice which could impede the strength of the thermohaline circulation promoting substantial N.H. cooling.
Adding to this theory is fairly strong evidence that a decrease in UV light will result in a more meridional atmospheric circulation (which should cause more clouds, precipitation and snow cover for the N.H.0), due to changes in ozone distribution in a vertical/horizontal sense which would cause the temperature contrast between the polar areas of the stratosphere and lower latitude areas of the stratosphere to lesson, during prolonged solar minimum periods. Ultra Violet light being likely the most significant solar factor affecting ozone concentrations ,although not the only solar factor.
This could then set up a more -NAO, (high pressure over Greenland) which would promote a more Northerly flow of air over the Nordic Sea, bringing the sea ice there further South.

“I’m open-minded that the real answer is more complicated, and it may be a combination of the two hypotheses,” said Mann. “This article paves the way for a more in-depth look at what is going on. The challenge now will be teasing apart the two effects and trying to assess the relative importance of both of them.”
==============
Is that the same as saying you’ve put the transmission into reverse and have your foot to the floor ?

I have plans to conduct a survey of all the leading climate scientists.
Buried in there wil be the question “do you know someone named Jack”
I then plan to publish the results with the title “Most climate scientist don’t know Jack.”

The air temperature over the vast majority of Greenland is–and stays–so far below freezing that temps would have to rise hugely in order for any significant melting to occur. Precise figures are doubtless available. As for the article, it is nonsense, as many of you have stated. What the sun does or doesn’t do will surely affect the earth, including Greenland; but the few tenths of a degree shown in the graphs (or postulated in some of the articles I’ve seen) won’t melt anything. When the warming is enough to take the temperature of sizeable portions of Greenland above freezing for whole seasons, then I’ll pay attention. Not now.

“The ice cores showed that for the past 2,000 years changes in Greenland temperatures have generally followed any temperature shifts occurring in the Northern Hemisphere.”
Not so. In the 8th century Greenland was particularly cold, while Europe was as warm or warmer than recent decades. The opposite happened around 1200 BC, which is erroneously called the Minoan Warming, that was a very cold-dry period for the mid latitudes that finished the Minoans off with most Mediterranean cultures as well as the European Neolithic culture.
“When the sun’s energy output increased, there was a bigger drop in Greenland’s temperature compared to the change in average temperature across the Northern Hemisphere.”
Which contradicts this sneaky earlier piece:
“Scientists have sought to understand why Greenland cooled during the 1970s through the early 1990s while most of the Northern Hemisphere experienced rising temperatures [as a result of greenhouse warming].”
So they giving it that the Sun cooled the Arctic but CO2 warmed everywhere else. That’s a big joke as increased CO2 forcing should increase positive NAO/AO, and that will cool the Arctic too just like a stronger solar signal will.
“Because the oceans take a long time to heat up or cool down, the temperature changes in Greenland lagged 10 to 40 years behind the high solar activity, showing up from the 1970s through the early 1990s, according to the new study.”
No they don’t, for example look at summer 2012, the deep negative NAO warmed Greenland and reduced a lot of sea ice. The low in the solar signal was then and not decades before, it all works at the scale of weather, the lags are weekly to seasonal. It’s then a matter of how the positives versus negatives accumulate over time. The last two summers have seen positive NAO and Arctic cooling. I made long range solar based forecasts for the weeks that would happen, and predicted a relative increase in sea ice extent on that basis.
And again they have the AMOC back to front. High solar gives positive NAO, which gives a fast AMOC. Low AMOC events occur during negative NAO episodes:
http://www.rapid.ac.uk/