Guest post by David Archibald,
The solar plasma temperature has plunged to a new low for the instrument record. Coincidentally or not, the temperature of the southern hemisphere has also plunged over the last couple of weeks. When do we start worrying?
Figure 1: Temperature of the solar wind plasma
As Figure 1 shows, the temperature of the solar wind has hit a new low for the instrument record. As it is energy from the Sun that keeps the Earth from looking like Pluto, the lower plasma temperature indicates that the Sun’s surface is cooling. Surely the Earth’s surface will follow.
Figure 2: Alpha particle to proton ratio in the solar wind
Similarly the alpha particle to proton ratio has hit a new low for the almost 50 years of the instrument record. The decline for the peak ratio in each solar cycle is even more dramatic. The question that naturally arises is this: Is there a lower bound for this ratio?
Figure 3: Solar wind flow pressure
Solar wind flow pressure has hit a new low for the instrument record. There a couple of interesting things about this chart. Note that the lows for the last three solar cycles are aligned as indicated by the blue line. This implies that there is a disciplined process involved. Note also the low activity in the late 1960s that set up the 1970s cooling period.
It is the solar wind flow pressure combined with the Sun’s magnetic field that reduces the flux of galactic cosmic rays reaching the Earth. As these two parameters we can expect a spike in the neutron flux about a year from now. In turn that is expected to increase cloud cover and the Earth’s albedo.
Figure 4: Kp Index
The Kp–index is a global auroral activity indicator on a scale from 0 to 9. What is evident in this graph is the change in regime from the Modern Warm Period that ended in 2006 and the New Cold Period.
Figure 5: Ap Index 1967 to 2020
According to Omniweb’s data the Ap Index has also hit a new low for its data record.
Figure 6: 2 metre temperature anomaly for 2020
Figure 6 is from Oxford academic Karsten Haustein’s website. It is updated daily. It shows that the temperature of the southern hemisphere (the blue line) has plunged 0.6°C in the last couple of weeks and is continuing to plunge. Could it be that the new lows for some solar parameters is having an instant response? The Antarctic plateau is the Earth’s refrigerator.
David Archibald is the author of The Anticancer Garden in Australia.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
very interesting psychologically
a group of scientists A (with believed truths) expound scenario B that the world is warming due to CO2
they perceive a group of lesser qualified detractors, sub group A, argue against this and therefore assume the moral high ground (refusing to join the debate)
A new group of scientists X (with believed truths) expound scenario Y that the world is cooling due to solar plasma
Group A now has to deal not with detractions nor arguments from lesser sub groups but an `other and equal` group, group X, who will command equal media time and coverage with equal believed truths
This would not only remove sub group A and any sub group X from the general discussion .
but would also nullify the subgroup argument as fight against either group is countermanded by the higher group and any argument by that subgroup is not bipolar, (not against one and for another at the same time).
popcorn time
@vuk
My comment to Javier is applicable.
Looks to me my observations are consistent with the so-called magnetic stirrer effect.
(the earth’s inside is aligned with the sun’s inside)
Every ca. 1000 years or so.
Eddy cycle?
Not to worry. We’re only about a year away from a permanent carbon tax in the U.S. to pay for many happy returns (to the advocacy army) for decades and generations to come. Details like freezing to death will not matter at that point. Social programs as climate justice will be locked to this revenue source and not movable thereafter.
Pay up or die and either way they get record it as a grand success.
Humm, looks familiar
I cannot believe there are still people who believe that the extra 0.01 % CO2 that was added in the past 60 years can warm the earth including all the oceans
https://breadonthewater.co.za/2019/12/15/greta-thunberg-the-savior-of-the-world/
47%
CO2 is a minor GHG. H2O is far and away the main one.
So over the past century we’ve gone from global average of 25,300 GHG molecules per million dry air molecules to 25,400. Ignoring those in ppb.
Unless you think water vapor has increased too. In which case, more clouds, in a negative feedback effect.
Great. Just great. The next Ice Age is coming on strong, just when I’m aged enough to start not just considering, but funding the oncoming disposal of my mortal remains. Oh, I still have several, if not many years left, which will only exacerbate the problem.
If I wait too long to die, the cost of fuel for cremation will have gone through the roof. Burial will also become cost prohibitive because of overcrowding and the need to use explosives to blast a hole rather than simple dig one. The residuals of the drugs I did for recreation as a youth combined with the drugs I’m prescribed as an elderly will probably be considered as too toxic to allow me to be dumped into the ocean.
Just my luck. What is a body to do? Catapulted into an active volcano, perhaps?
There is not much for me to say after 300 wise, knowledgeable comments. In this very interesting article I picked out three little words : there appears to be a “DISCIPLINED PROCESS INVOLVED”.
And do we really have much understanding of just what determines that discipline in our huge gaseous life-giver and (probably) climate decider??
Loydo
you say : it (the increase in CO2 in the atm) is 47%
Loydo, sorry, I don’t understand your logic. 60 years ago the CO2 content was 0.03% and now it is 0.04%. That would be 0.01/0.03 x 100= a 33% increase over 60 years, relatively speaking, looking at the CO2. However, surely it only counts as 0.01% that was added to the atmosphere? That compares with ca. 1% water vapor content at sea level. In most habitable places on earth the water content of the atmosphere actually is rather between 4 and 5%. You see that that 0.01% is hardly anything at all? That is how big the earth is….As to Henry’s law and how the CO2 is getting into the atmosphere and how it is sucked out again, I would ask you to click on my name and read my report on that.
In fact, I even did some calculations on the warming effect of CO2, by the application of Wien’s law. I don’t come to anything much at all …Maybe I made a mistake somewhere and you can show me how to do the calculation correctly?
https://1drv.ms/w/s!At1HSpspVHO9pwx0EPc_q0yoFNKR?e=4Qmgfx
(I would prefer to see a calculation worked out per molecule CO2)
That would be great.
This is why there is no energy human footprint detected on the planet and any tiny change in energy from the sun dwarfs it. Especially when more energy is allowed in by a global reduction in reflected solar flux.
The amount of energy from the sun the planet receives over 60 years =3.29E+26 Joules
Energy from CO2 over the same 60 years =1.352E+18 Joules
The amount of energy from the sun over 60 years compared with CO2 is 243.3 million times larger.
Just a 0.1% increase in solar energy in joules over 60 years = 3.29E+23 Joules
This amount of energy over 60 years is 243324 times larger than CO2.
Therefore any energy change detected in the oceans and atmosphere is undetectable when the main energy source is hundreds of thousands times larger with just a 0.1% change. This is why the oceans warming over recent decades has occurred by a global reduction in reflected solar flux.
Matt
Very interesting. But how did you calculate the energy fron CO2?
I know that in fish nurseries they add a drop of surfactant on top of the ponds to keep heat in. Would oily contaminations not be a much more likely explanation for the warming of the oceans?
The calculation resulted from when electron volts with CO2 molecules etc. were converted into W/m2 for the whole planet.
Therefore in your example 1.4E-6 W/m2 becomes 7.15E+8 joules/s giving 1.351E+18 Joules over 60 years.
Regarding oily containments I’m not convinced about the situation on a large scale, but it seems in the ocean at least it’s like placing a drop of oil in a swimming pool. Salt lakes/solar ponds are also used for storing energy in keeping significant heat in especially deeper water. (not much good for fish though)
There was a comment of mine that went in moderation. It is missing?
OMG! Quick, get rid of all of our incandescent bulbs and put billions of dollars in carbon neutral funds to prepare for the end of the world!!
The Carbon Emissions are worse than we thought – they’ve now reached the Sun and inexplicably triggered climate change on the sun! which will exacerbate climate change here on Earth!
George Takai says :
The Carbon Emissions are worse than we thought – they’ve now reached the Sun and inexplicably triggered climate change on the sun!
—————————————-
Did you mean The Galactic Current Sheet instead perhaps ?
It’s going to be real funny when it is finally revealed that God is in control of it all and the entire universe complies with his will.
yiddish lion
There is something really ironic here, that I want to share with you.
The title of the David Archibald’s post here suggests that if the temperature of the sun goes down, the temperature of earth will go down as well…
(by me) that is in fact not at all how God’s window (of warmth to earth) is working.
=> The lower the solar polar magnetic field strengths
=> the more of the most energetic particles can escape from the sun
=> Earth defends us against these particles that are very dangerous to humans by forming ozone, HxOx and NxOx, at the TOA
(don’t go to Mars before first making an earth-like atmosphere)
=> The more O3, HxOx and NxOx formed at the TOA, the less UV that gets through the atmosphere
=> the less UV in the oceans, the cooler earth will get
(it is the oceans that drives delta T, not the atmosphere)
So, as it happens, by me,
: the hotter the sun, the cooler the earth.
Matt
Very interesting. But how did you calculate the energy fron CO2?
I know that in fish nurseries they add a drop of surfactant on top of the ponds to keep heat in. Would oily contaminations not be a much more likely explanation for the warming of the oceans?
Was a representative from the Sun invited to the Paris Climate Accords? Maybe it’s their way of saying “Hey, we matter, too.”
They didn’t want anyone else starring in the show. 🙂
According to the Miskolczi Greenhouse Theory, MGT, the Earth’s atmosphere has a theoretical equilibrium infrared optical thickness, τM , which is controlled by the radiative equilibrium, the virial, the energy conservation, and the Kirchhoff laws. He postulates, that in the water rich planet of Earth the chaotic space time distribution
of the atmospheric water vapor maintains the above constant theoretical infrared optical thickness. For the whole Earth-atmosphere system, to stay at the global radiative balance the excess water vapor will precipitate out and the deficit will be supplied by evaporation from the surface and cloud top.
In 2010 in his third article, [3], using different climatologic radiosonde archives and unprecedented numerical accuracy in his radiative transfer code he showed that the directly observed infrared absorption properties of the atmosphere are fully consistent with the theoretical expectations and the global average infrared optical thickness is really 1.87 . In 2011 he presented new results, [4], and showed that the global average IR optical thickness remains constant while using radiosonde time series of different length.
People who furiously wedgie themselves in response to Miskolczi make the same mistake as those who respond in the same way to Nikolov and Zeller’s observation of planet temperature being independent of gas composition. They attack the theory and the maths. But neither of them are theories. They are observations. Miskolczi’s equations were confirmed by radiosonde balloon 🎈 measurements. Something that nowadays no-one seems to do any more, preferring just computer modelling.
You should worry when you can do something about it.
“It is updated daily. It shows that the temperature of the southern hemisphere (the blue line) has plunged 0.6°C in the last couple of weeks and is continuing to plunge.”
And a week later the blue line had completely recovered. A week after that it has fallen 0.2°C, still 0.4°C above the point when the plunge was apparently continuing.
Meanwhile, UAH shows August in the Southern Hemisphere was 0.38°C above the 1981 – 2010 average. Almost identical to August last year.