Influence of solar activity on European rainfall

Dr. Sebastian Luening writes to advise us of this.

Press Release

Institute of Hydrography, Geoecology and Climate Sciences (IFHGK), www.ifhgk.org

15th February 2019

Influence of solar activity on European rainfall

A balanced level of precipitation provides the basis for a wide range of economic and social activities in Europe. Particularly agriculture, drinking water supply and inland waterway transport are directly affected. However, the amount of rain fluctuates strongly from year to year. While it may pour torrentially in one year, rain may remain absent for weeks in another year. The population is used to this variability and knows how to deal with it.

The chance discovery by an agricultural scientist from Münster, Germany, now suggests that in certain months rain over Germany and other parts of Europe follows a pattern that up to now has remained undetected. As part of agricultural consultation, Ludger Laurenz analyzed decades of rainfall records of his home weather station in Münster and noticed a constant up and down that followed an 11-year rhythm – especially in February. After detailed examination it was clear that this rhythm correlated closely with the activity of the sun: the well-documented 11-year sunspot cycle.

Laurenz next teamed up with two colleagues to examine the extent to which the observed pattern from Münster is reproducible in other parts of Germany and Europe, and whether the phenomenon also exists for the other months of the year. Horst-Joachim Lüdecke from the HTW University of Applied Sciences in Saarland gathered the precipitation data collected in Europe since the beginning of the 20th century. The physicist emeritus then developed a computer algorithm to determine the similarity of changes in rainfall and solar activity. All 39 European countries and every one of the 12 months of the year were quantified over a total of 115 years using mathematical correlations.

In order to include possible delay effects, the data series of rain and sunspots were systematically checked for shifts. For this purpose, the time series were gradually shifted in time against each other like combs and the respective change of the correlation quality was noted. The multidimensional data obtained in this way were evaluated for systematic trends by geoscientist Sebastian Lüning and visualized cartographically. Lüning is associated with the Swiss Institute of Hydrography, Geoecology and Climate Sciences (IFHGK) and is specialized in the research of solar climate effects.

The mapped out results show that the link between February precipitation and solar activity originally discovered in Münster is valid for large parts of Central and Northern Europe and has good statistical significance there. Towards southern Europe, however, the correlation weakens significantly.

The statistical investigation was also able to demonstrate systematic phase shifts across the continent. In Germany and neighboring countries, February precipitation was particularly low when the sun was very strong four years earlier. The delay seems to be due to the slow deep circulation of the Atlantic, as earlier work had already suggested. On the basis of the statistically-empirically determined correlation, February 2018 in Germany with particularly low precipitation can now also be explained, which followed a particularly high intensity peak of solar activity at the beginning of 2014.

Similar relationships between rainfall and solar activity have been observed in other months, although somewhat weaker, especially in April, June and July, which account for a large part of the vegetation period in Central Europe. The result was a complex interplay of sun and rain in Europe, which showed clear trends over 1000 km and varied strongly from month to month.

The study thus confirms the concept of a solar participation in the European hydroclimatic development, which had already been indicated by a whole series of local case studies of other authors. The exact mechanism by which the solar signal influences precipitation is still largely unclear and requires further research.

The solar precipitation effect now mapped out across Europe for the first time opens up new possibilities for improved medium-term precipitation forecasts. Agriculture in particular, but also protection measures against extreme weather damage in connection with heavy rainfall and droughts could benefit from this. The next step in refining the forecasting methodology is a more precise quantification of the effects of Atlantic Ocean cycles, which also play an important role in rainfall, especially in Western Europe.

Original publication:

Laurenz, L., H.-J. Lüdecke, S. Lüning (2019): Influence of solar activity on European rainfall. J. Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics, 185: 29-42, doi: 10.1016/j.jastp.2019.01.012

The pdf version can be downloaded free of charge at the following link until early March: https://authors.elsevier.com/a/1YXWZ4sIlkiVhv

Advertisements

70 thoughts on “Influence of solar activity on European rainfall

  1. Hardly surprising. To be expected, but good to have detailed relationships, of use to commodity futures traders, which include farmers.

  2. The graph looks convincing
    https://ars.els-cdn.com/content/image/1-s2.0-S1364682618305273-gr1_lrg.jpg
    r=0.5, gives R^2=0.25 making it a negligible correlation

    however if graph is constructed using the optimum lag as quoted:
    “Optimum lag values are +20 months in central Western Europe, −105 months in Sweden and Estonia, and −65 months on the Balkans ”
    forget it, it invalidates the hypothesis (severe case of cherry picking then shuffling until it fits into graph)

    • Yes, but in this case Willis is correct, and you have to apply a correction like the Bonferroni correction (not the best around), because if you look at enough locations and with different lags, statistically you will find one that gives you a very good correlation just by chance. Then, out of 300 stations you show the best with the best lag and claim statistical significance.

      I don’t think the statistics of the article are strong enough for their claims.

      The problem is if solar activity probabilistically affects winter storm track through Europe, as it appears from other studies and paleoclimatology, the effect is seasonally tied and highly dependent on the area analyzed, as precipitations decrease in Northern Europe winters during low solar activity, but increase in Southern Europe. If you check that by regional lags, the differences are enormous.

    • I am a little old fashioned. Give me a Farmers Almanac, irrigation, fertilizer and fuel for my equipment and you can keep the spurious correlations; maybe do something productive with your work like making a child’s board game.

      Go Habs,

      Speed

        • They also got chewed up by the Predators but maybe they will do better against the Florida Putty Tats?

          Cheers,

          Speed

      • Hi GF
        My family was for generations in the vineyard cultivating business. My grandfather who never heard of the ‘Farmers Almanac’, whatever that is, for some strange reason claimed that he could tell how sunny is going to be late August – early September (when the grapes ripen) by the intensity and length of the frost in January and the early February. I suppose there could be some solar link , since for the good frost cloudless winter nights are required for that part of southern Europe. The first one is just after winter solstice and the other is just before autumn equinox, if he was correct, then it is some kind of the sun-earth orbital relationship effect, perhaps with solar activity thrown in.

  3. Solar scientists have long argued the increase of carbon dioxide from emissions is not the only explanation for the recent warming trend.

    The charged sub-atomic particles of high-energy galactic cosmic rays (GCR’s) stimulate cloud formation through a process called atmospheric aerosol nucleation. Sunspot quantity indicates variations in solar wind intensity, the ionized particle stream of the Sun’s magnetic field. A “stronger” solar wind deflects cosmic radiation thereby reducing clouding. Less cloudiness allows more sunlight to reach and warm the planet’s surface, hence the slight warming trend just ending.

    The 12 and 30 year orbital periods of Jupiter and Saturn through their gravitational influence on the Sun’s as well as the Earth’s magnetic field may also contribute to the process. Cosmic radiation is increasing as the 11yr sunspot cycle, recently at its highest maximum of the century, may be entering an extended minimum phase.

    According to the cosmic ray/cloud seeding hypothesis this will increase cloudiness; a 30 yr. cooling trend is predicted, some suggest another maunder type maunder minimum has started.

    Anyways, just my understanding….time will tell.

    • Doubtful that a Maunder-style Grand Solar Minimum is in the offing, or even a Dalton-style minimum. But definitely lower than during the solar maximum of the 20th century, comparable to that of the Medieval Warm Period.

      If there has been a discernible human influence on “climate”, it’s more likely cleaning up the air over Europe and America than from a fourth molecule of plant food per 10,000 dry air molecules over the past century. But now China and India are dirtying up the air again, blocking sunlight as during the heyday of the dark Satanic mills of yore.

      • John Tillman:

        “But now China and India are dirtying up the air again, blocking sunlight as during the heyday of the dark Satanic mills of yore”

        Actually, China has massively reduced its Sulfur Dioxide pollution, which is the sunlight blocking aerosol. India’s output, although increasing, is still tiny, in comparison.

        https:/www.earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/91270/sulfur-dioxide-emissions-fall-in-china-rise-in-india

        • Agreed. China = dirty air is a convenient excuse but a bit passé. They are tackling their huge environmental problems as a matter of priority. Air quality is much improved. They are also selling modern coal fired generating plants to other countries.

        • Sulfur dioxide has dropped in China over the past decade, but is still high. More importantly, other pollutants remain, to include the soot which lands on Arctic sea ice, promoting its melting.

          Thanks for your link, though. However it says:

          “Despite the 75 percent drop in sulfur dioxide emissions, recent work by other scientists has shown that the country’s air quality remains poor and still causes significant health problems. This may be because sulfur dioxide contributes just 10 to 20 percent of the particles that cause haze. “If China wants to bring blue skies back to Beijing,” Li said, “the country needs to also control other air pollutants.””

    • some suggest another maunder type maunder minimum has started.

      Without proper basis. Perhaps they looked at the entrails of animals.

    • “some suggest”

      Javier, given the supposition involved I thought it best not to name names.
      As far as I know, solar scientist Timo Niroma was not collecting data from animal entrails for his research.

      Maybe you know something I don’t.

      • I have one article from Niroma in 2009 Energy & Environment, which is not a very good journal. He doesn’t say anything about a coming solar grand minimum. Maybe you know something I don’t.

        By the way, the article doesn’t appear to have been cited ever. Google scholar doesn’t show any citation for it. And I can’t find anything else published by him. So I wonder why you would mention him.

        • I have to apologize, the latest pages on astrology are not from Timo Niroma, but from someone else.

          However it is clear from Niroma’s part, that his predictions weren’t good. He predicted in 2003 sunspots until 2011 and didn’t do a very good job.

      • Javier, I came across this quote from Dr. Niroma maybe nine or ten years ago…and saved it. This is all I have:

        “The rise of CO2 in the atmosphere from 0.03 to 0.04% does not have any meaning in this play where water vapour is far the greatest player. I’m a statistician and this is a statistical study, but a remark for those, who urgently for years have asked me what I think about the physical link: The Earth’s magnetic field is very sensible to variations in the solar magnetic field. This may have far greater effects to Earth than just the aurorae or breakdown of man-made electrical grids. I find the Svensmark theory (2006) of cosmic rays oscillating to the rhythm of the Sun’s magnetic field as the most promising. More cosmic rays leads to more clouds in the lower atmosphere, which cools the Earth. The CERN investigations in 2010 probably will settle the issue. As I understand it the water vapour is the most forceful greenhouse gas. Although in the beginning a positive feedback when the water vapour changes to clouds the feedback changes to negative thus keeping a balance, where a 0.01% increase can’t have any discernible influence.. There are also indications that the UV spectrum of the solar radiation oscillates many times more than the visible part. A sizable drop in UV plus sizable drop in TSI (Total Solar Irridiance) plus sizable drop in the spots’ magnetic power combined with on-going cycle switches with bottom values creates thus an environment where all preconditions for a Maunder Minimum type minimum are set.”

  4. This paper appears to be a classic case of “p-hacking”. They take the data by month for each location and slide it across the data for sunspot numbers until they find a maximum correlation. For example look at Table S1
    which shows the lag by month that gives the maximum correlation — Germany goes
    Germany -28 17 -97 -2 -52 -92 14 -120 -91 1 -31 -110
    so in January the best correlation is with sun spot numbers 28 months previously but then in February the
    best correlation is with sunspot numbers 17 months in the future — i.e. rainfall in Germany will cause sunspots one year in the future. The shifts from month to month are too large for this to be anything other than random noise. Similarly the correlation goes from positive to negative from month to month and from location to location.

    In their tables there are 39 countries, 12 months and they consider lags between -120 and +24 months. So they have looked at more than 67000 possible correlations and taken the ones that are the highest!

    • agree,
      “Optimum lag values are +20 months in central Western Europe, −105 months in Sweden and Estonia, and −65 months on the Balkans ” , this is a bit of day one, month four joke.

      • As I said solar activity affects winter stormtracks over Europe. This is not the way to look at it. Michael Magny has been doing a fantastic work on the relationship between solar activity and mid-European lakes level during the Holocene.

        It is clear that a relationship exists between European precipitation and solar activity. It is clear that this article fails to prove it.

    • Yet again another comment has gone missing. Maybe too many links, but this happens with disturbing frequency with or without links.

    • PJ
      The practical test will be whether or not the correlations for individual regions hold up in the future, or if they are just random, spurious correlations. The farmers aren’t going to be particularly excited about a correlation coefficient. However, if someone can run with the hypothesis and demonstrate that they can tell the farmers something about precipitation they didn’t know and couldn’t find elsewhere, the farmers should be willing to pay for the information. It will then be up to the academic meteorologists to explain what is happening and why. It isn’t exceptional that different climate zones will react differently to something like the El Nino, so why should one fault a hypothesis based on the lags being different in different regions? Farmers are pragmatists. They are more interested in whether something works than they are if experts can explain it.

      • Clyde,
        It is not that different climate regions have different response but that the same climate region has very different response from month to month. Again looking at
        Germany in February the best correlation occurs with sunspot numbers 17 months in the future but in March the best correlation is now with sunspot numbers 97 months in the past. And with the best will in the world that seems like random noise rather than anything real and/or causal.

    • I think it’s quite fair and honest to “show the lag by month that gives the maximum correlation,” even if it goes against what they propose. Isn’t that sort of result supposed to be presented rather than hidden?

      The shifts from month-to-month…well that is to be expected unless this were the overwhelmingly dominant factor for all months. The commentary says that, “The next step in refining the forecasting methodology is a more precise quantification of the effects of Atlantic Ocean cycles, which also play an important role in rainfall, especially in Western Europe,” so they admit there are other factors at play.

      I think it seems a bit hokey, but I think they were primarily performing a data analysis and presenting the results, not trying to present a fine-tuned predictive model.

  5. The correlation between rainfall and the solar cycle and other solar effects has been known for about a century.

    Here’s a study from the Sahel, Africa, 1974:

    https://www.nature.com/articles/251594a0

    And a 1989 paper on the Indian monsoon:

    https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00867947

    Rainfall in Brazil, from 2002:

    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/26489907_Rainfall_cycles_with_bidecadal_periods_in_the_Brazilian_region

    Solar magnetic phases v. SOI in Eastern Oz, 2008:

    https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1745-5871.2008.00537.x

    Among dozens if not hundreds of similar studies since at least the 1920s.

  6. From the above article: “On the basis of the statistically-empirically determined correlation, February 2018 in Germany with particularly low precipitation can now also be explained, which followed a particularly high intensity peak of solar activity at the beginning of 2014.”

    So, we have a statistical correlation for one month with a four-year phase delay, but—surprise—“the link between February precipitation and solar activity originally discovered in Münster is valid for large parts of Central and Northern Europe and has good statistical significance there. Towards southern Europe, however, the correlation weakens significantly”.

    Let’s see, a random correlation—considering that correlation does not equal causation—is akin to a GIGO “discovery.”

  7. Bloody interesting stuff. Someone please let that imminent Australian rainfall scientist Tim Flannery know about this. And I thought the science was all settled.

  8. A classic example of data mining. The authors explored the relationship between sunspot number at precipitation during 12 different months, in about 40 different countries with 144 possible lags (+24 to -120 months). Is it surprising that the authors found some lagged correlations that explain less than 25% of the variance in rainfall? With DIFFERENT LAGS in different countries?

    If you think solar activity is modulating cosmic rays and thereby clouds through the strength of the solar magnetic field, then you expect a relationship with no or very little lag.

    In most cases, the data is expressed in terms a solar lag. In other word, the number of sun spots is being effected 17 months later by the rainfall in February (the month with the strongest correlation) or the number of sunspots 110-17 = 93 months earlier is effecting rainfall in February. In other words, the sunspot effect somewhere in our climate system needs to persist without dissipation for more than 8 years before it has an effect on precipitation.

    The authors discuss the relationship between sunspots and the NAO:

    “Long-term trends of solar activity and the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) were mostly in-phase since 1940, implying that low and high solar activity were typically associated with NAO- and NAO + conditions, respectively (Gray et al., 2013; Scaife et al., 2013; Thiéblemont et al., 2015). During NAO- conditions, the westerly storm belt typically shifts southwards to southern Europe, leading to increased amounts of rain there, whilst resulting in reduced precipitation in central Europe (Morley et al., 2014; Wirth et al., 2013b). Correspondingly, the westerly storm belt hits central Europe during NAO + conditions, bringing increased amounts of rain there.”

    The state of the NAO is a perfectly good reason for European precipitation to vary, but the authors acknowledge that solar activity has been out of phase with the NAO and is therefore does not modulate the NAO. Which leads to obvious cause-and-effect questions about the NAO and precipitation the authors didn’t bother to pursue.

    • There is no convincing longer term relationship between the NAO or the AMO with the solar activity.
      However, there is an odd relationship with a 11 year lag between the NAO’s 11 year moving average (atmospheric, fast variable) and the AMO’s 3 year ma (ocean, slow variability) as you can see here
      but not available elsewhere.

      • Vukcevic,

        The Perigean New/Full moon tidal cycle naturally breaks up into 62-year epochs that just happen to match the ~ 60-year anti-correlation and then ~ 60-year correlation you notice between the NAO and (lagged) AMO:

        1870 – 1932 – anti-correlation
        1932 – 1994 – correlation

        It would be interesting to see if the 1994 – 2056 period produces another period of anti-correlation.
        Just a preliminary observation based upon little to evidence so far: It looks as though we might be entering a period of anti-correlation again.

    • Although correlation is not causation, it is a requirement.

      But the best way to remove the lunar and solar influences from the temperature data is to de-trend the data and then cook it.

      If there happens to be any residual variability in the data, invent an oscillation – and then treat the oscillation as casual.

      That way you never to have to look up.

  9. An 11yr cycle is almost certain to be found somewhere for something.
    Show me a corresponding Southern Hemisphere equivalent.
    Colour me Sceptic.

    • There are more solar cycle-rainfall correspondences in the SH and NH tropics than in the temperate zone.

  10. Wonderful paper. The Modern Warm Period shows up clearly in Figure 1 from the rainfall alone. Which means that Europe is going to be cold and drier as solar activity falls. This is Lake Victoria write large.

  11. This parallels Svensmark.
    Isn’t worldwide rain increasing in the past few years?

    Didn’t SVENSMARK a decade or two ago predict that decreased solar activity and geomagnetic decreases would = more cosmic rays = more clouds (and thus more rain) = cooler temps?

    Not only will REFLECTION take place, but rain brings down the cooler upper atmosphere air, and alternately warmer air goes up and heat is more easily dispersed into the cosmos / outer space.

  12. Is there an analogous paper on temperature vs rainfall for Europe? CO2 vs rainfall? Let’s see those correlations…

  13. Here are a couple of truths:

    a) We must start out with the null hypothesis that there is NO KNOWN correlation between the level of the Sun’s magnetic activity cycle and parameters that characterize the climate here on Earth.

    b) It is up to those who claim that there is a correlation, to present their evidence to the scientific community for scrutiny. The fundamental nature of this process means that the null hypothesis stands until it can be (demonstrably) shown to be false. This is a very difficult (but necessary) barrier to overcome.

    c) Ideally, it would be far better if someone could propose a plausible physical mechanism that links the level of solar activity to climate. If they did this then they could go out and see if the observational data was available to support their hypothesis (as opposed to the null hypothesis).

    d) In reality, our ignorance of how the climate system works means that we are groping around in the dark as to which (if any) solar-driven physical mechanism could have an impact upon climate. This means that the proponents of a possible link between solar activity and climate must (by necessity) use observational correlations to search for a possible plausible mechanism that could underly this (possible) link.

    e) The proponent of ‘a possible link between solar activity and climate must avoid the temptation to claim that observational correlation means causation. In reality, even the strongest observational evidence only acts as a guide as to which of the possible underlying physical mechanisms could be responsible for the link.

    f) Ideally, the following logical sequence of events would be preferable:

    Make a hypothesis based up a physical mechanism that could cause a link –> propose an observational test that would fairly test this hypothesis –> see if the observational data either supports or disproves the hypothesis.

    g) In the real world of climatology, it is very difficult if not impossible to carry out this logical sequence of events.

    h) The scientific purists mistakenly believe that this logical sequence must be adhered to under all circumstances. They are adamant that the first step is the formulation of the hypothesis based upon a physically plausible mechanism.

    i) Scientific realists, however, understand that in order to formulate the original hypothesis you must start out with an observation or idea that can be used to narrow down which of the many mechanism is worth testing. This is where the search for correlations between Sun’s magnetic cycle and parameters that characterize the climate here on Earth, come to the fore. If such correlations can be found, they act as the eyes and ears for scientists who are searching for potential mechanisms that could establish an underlying link.

    I propose that evidence for one possible mechanism could be found if someone could investigate whether or not there is a correlation between the level of solar activity and the vorticity (circular wind speed about the high-pressure cell) and/or strength (central mean pressure) of one of the four to five semi-permanent highs embedded in the Southern sub-tropical high-pressure ridge.

    my two cents.

    • That’s $9 not 2 cents. Considering the biblical tone, what is rule number 10, might I ask?

      Svensmark has dealt with all these commandments.

  14. If they search hard, I’m sure they will find correlations between European rains, solar cycles, climate change and Fibonacci numbers. Why even the stock market follows Fibonacci numbers! Climate scientists have not yet discovered what stockbrokers have discovered long ago. The Elliot wave is correlated to life, the universe and everything :-0

    • Considering that London/WallStreet hires physicists (I’ve seen some picked up) who theyhappily apply their pair-wise maths, and regularly blow the market up (dotCom, LTCM, Lehman – a diverging series…) claiming it cannot be them ! According to these geniuses the solar system should long ago have fallen apart (three body problem). We need regulation to stop that herd!

      Lie down with entropy, get up with a hockey stick, whether climate or finance.

  15. “Honouring cause and effect, it is suspected that increases in rainfall are actually triggered by the solar minimum some 3–4 years before the rainfall month. Lags of a few years also occur between solar activity and the solar-synchronized-NAO, possibly due to memory effects in the Atlantic.”

    Sunspot minimum was Dec 2008, and 3-4 years later, Feb 2012 and Feb 2013 were drier than Feb 2018 in England and Wales:
    https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadukp/data/monthly/HadEWP_monthly_qc.txt

    “NAO+ (NAO-) typically lags the solar maximum (minimum) by a few years, possibly due to accumulation and memory effects in the Atlantic”

    Because the solar wind lags the solar maximum by 2-6 years and the solar minimum by about one year, the AMO doesn’t lag the NAO by a few years. High speed coronal hole streams can happen in any given February at almost any point in the solar cycle, driving positive NAO states and a wetter February. The scale of that noise is huge compared to the mean changes through the solar cycle. Any correlation to solar cycles has to take account of the NAO and AMO shifting in and out of phase with sunspot cycles.
    AMO and SSN:
    https://snag.gy/pPQRUY.jpg

    Such huge year to year changes cannot be predicted with solar cycles, it takes at least a AO/NAO forecast for that month and the current SST driven blocking patterns.
    https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/pub/data/weather/uk/climate/actualmonthly/2/Rainfall/England.gif

  16. Similar relationships between rainfall and solar activity have been observed in other months, although somewhat weaker, especially in April, June and July, which account for a large part of the vegetation period in Central Europe. The result was a complex interplay of sun and rain in Europe, which showed clear trends over 1000 km and varied strongly from month to month.

    The study thus confirms the concept of a solar participation in the European hydroclimatic development, which had already been indicated by a whole series of local case studies of other authors. The exact mechanism by which the solar signal influences precipitation is still largely unclear and requires further research.
    ___________________________________________________

    https://www.google.com/search?client=ms-android-samsung&ei=wWplXPuON8eorgSZrJe4BA&q=lesser+coronal+ejections+sunspots+&oq=lesser+coronal+ejections+sunspots+&gs_l=mobile-gws-wiz-serp

    lesser coronal ejections lesser water drops condensation nuclei.

    Simple as that.

  17. Ian says

    Make a hypothesis based up [sic} a physical mechanism that could cause a link –> propose an observational test that would fairly test this hypothesis –> see if the observational data either supports or disproves the hypothesis.

    Let me try:
    https://leif.org/research/Solar-Polar-Fields-1966-now.png

    Do you see it? You can draw bi-nomials from top to bottom and from bottom to top for the solar magnetic field strength from 1971 -2014 showing exactly one half of the Gleissberg cycle. The 11 year cycle is only a portion of the story. There are more solar cycles. The whole solar cycle is actually 22 years [on average] and it makes for only one quadrant of the GB cycle.

    But how does global cooling work? [it is happening already]

    i.e. good correlation of certain planets’ position with sunspots/ solar magnetic activity – may be causal or not –
    means
    => lower solar magnetic activity
    => more of the most energetic particles being able to escape from the sun
    => more ozone, N-oxides and peroxides formed TOA [good correlation found between increasing ozone and decreasing solar magnetic field strength]
    !!! earth’s atmosphere is protecting us – hence do not go to Mars before you have created an earth-like atmosphere.
    => more ozone & others formed TOA means less energy coming through the atmosphere [good correlation found between decreasing Tmax and Tmin and decreasing solar magnetic feild strengths andincreasing ozone ]
    => apparently more UV being deflected off from earth by ozone & others
    => also less UV [heat] going into the oceans
    => it is globally cooling.

    What does global cooling mean for the future?

    Simple physics tells me that as the temperature differential between the poles and equator grows larger due to the cooling from the top, very likely something will also change on earth. Predictably, there would be a small (?) shift of cloud formation and precipitation, more towards the equator, on average. At the equator insolation is 684 W/m2 whereas on average it is 342 W/m2. So, if there are more clouds in and around the equator, this will amplify the cooling effect due to less direct natural insolation of earth (clouds deflect a lot of radiation). Furthermore, in a cooling world there is more likely less moisture in the air, but even assuming equal amounts of water vapor available in the air, a lesser amount of clouds and precipitation will be available for spreading to higher latitudes. So, a natural consequence of global cooling is that at the higher latitudes it will become both cooler (winters) and warmer (drier summers). It is happening already, is it not?

    Again, this probably not the whole story. There are signs that the greening of earth – as is also happening on a big scale – both in the oceans and on land – is also trapping heat again. This is what currently seems to delay the global cooling. Also the shift of earth’s inner core, more north east, is another factor causing the warming of the nh.
    Click on my name to read my relevant final report.

    • Sorry Ian. I forgot about the moon. It is currently at its nearest point to earth?
      Would that not cause more upwelling of the cooler water from the bottoms of the oceans, and, hence, enhance global cooling?

  18. Sorry Ian. I forgot about the moon. It is currently at its nearest point to earth?
    Would that not cause more upwelling of the cooler water from the bottoms of the oceans, and, hence, enhance global cooling?

Comments are closed.