xmlns="http://www.google.com/schemas/sitemap-image/1.1"
white people jokes|white people whip circle
http://www.vidiohate.cf/sample.htmlhttp://www.vidiohate.cf/image.jpghttp://www.vidiohate.cf/photo.jpg
박재범 Jay Park '사실은 (The truth is)' Official Music Video
"And when it's that time of the month I hope it's more painful than usual" SAVAGE
박재범 Jay Park - [사실은 (The truth is)] Trailer
2016. 03. 22. 0AM
박재범 Jay Park - [사실은 (The truth is)]
#박재범 #JayPark #사실은 #Thetruthis #AOMG
160213 박재범 - 몸매(MOMMAE) - AOMG Concert Busan
music video directors
music video production
music video editing software
music videos
music videos without music
music video software
레디(Reddy)와 박재범, 두 사람의 필연적인 만남이 낳은 진솔한 사랑 고백
♬ Download on iTunes (Music) : https://itunes.apple.com/us/album/sae...
♪ Wanna know more about your favorite K-pop artist? Visit! http://mwave.interest.me/index.m
레디(Reddy) - Think (Feat. Jay Park)
사랑하는 이에게 거창한 말보다는 진실한 고백으로 감정을 전하는 싱글 ’생각해’는 평소 솔직한 감정을 전하기 어려웠던 연인들에게 완벽한 선물이 될 것이다.
디자이너, 스타일리스트, 패션모델로 활동하며 음악 이외에도 많은 재능을 펼치고 있는 레디가 새롭게 내어놓는 싱글 ‘생각해’는 뮤지션 레디의 또 다른 매력을 느낄 수 있는 곡이다. 슬로우 템포의 알앤비 비트 위에 레디(Reddy)는 보다 탄탄해진 플로우로 진솔한 감정을 풀어놓는다. 힙합과 알앤비의 경계를 넘나들며 그 실력을 인정받고 있는 박재범의 참여는 필연적이었다고 생각 들 만큼 두 아티스트의 호흡은 완벽하다.
프로듀서 우기(Woogie)가 선사한 몽환적인 분위기의 반주는 레디와 박재범이 들려주는 이야기에 더욱 귀 기울이게 한다.
CJ E&M Music은 아시아 No.1 엔터테인먼트 기업인 CJ E&M의 음악사업 브랜드로 음원/음반의 투자/제작/유통부터 콘서트/페스티벌 개최까지 포함하고 있습니다. CJ E&M MUSIC과 함께 하는 K-POP 아티스트들의 신곡과 뮤직비디오, 미공개 독점 영상 등을 이곳 YOUTUBE 채널에서 가장 먼저 만나보세요.
CJ E&M Music is a music business brand of CJ E&M, Asia's No.1 entertainment company. CJ E&M Music covers investment, production and distribution of album and also provides the best music festival and concerts. Meet the K-POP artists' brand new music videos and exclusive video clips on the official YouTube of CJ E&M Music.
CJ E&M, CJENM, CJENMMUSIC, K-CULTURE, korean Music, MV, Music Video, K-Pop, Kpop, 뮤비, 뮤직비디오, 우기, Woogie, 레디, Reddy, 박재범, Jay Park, 박재범 솔로, 코홀트, 오케이션 레디, 마술, 하이라이트, 하이라이트레코즈, 하이라이트레코즈 레디, 사랑고백, 레디 생각해, 팔로알토, 비트리, 허클베리피, 나아람, are u reddy, 레디 박재범, amog, amog 박재범, 쇼미더머니, 힙합, 랩, 힙합 노래, 한국 힙합
지코 (ZICO) - 너는 나 나는 너 (I Am You, You Are Me) MV
루나는 이미 ‘복면가왕’을 통해 가창력을 인정받은 보컬이라 안정감을 주고, 지코는 곡의 디렉팅을 통해 자신의 감성을 루나의 보이스를 통해 표현하였다. 뮤비에는 AKB48(에이케이비48)출신의 배우 시노다 마리코가 열연하며 음악의 감성을 더욱 살리는 연기를 선보였다.
소속사인 세븐시즌스는 2트랙 모두 곡 자체의 감성을 충분히 이해하려 노력한 지코의 면모가 곳곳에서 느껴지는 곡이라고 볼 수 있다고 밝혔다.
지코는 랩과 보컬이라는 두 가지 변신으로 대중들을 놀라게 만든다. 끊임없는 변신을 통해 자신을 새롭게 만들고 있는 지코다. 솔로로서 눈부시게 활약하며 자신의 에너지를 정점에 끌어올린 지코가 그룹을 통해서는 또 어떤 색다른 모습을 선보일지 2016 블락비의 완전체 활동 또한 기대해본다. 올해의 첫 시작과 함께 새로운 장르에 도전하며, 이미지에 국한되지 않은 채 자신의 모든 역량을 쏟아 넣은 지코의 스페셜한 이번 앨범이 기대된다.
CJ E&M Music은 아시아 No.1 엔터테인먼트 기업인 CJ E&M의 음악사업 브랜드로 음원/음반의 투자/제작/유통부터 콘서트/페스티벌 개최까지 포함하고 있습니다. CJ E&M MUSIC과 함께 하는 K-POP 아티스트들의 신곡과 뮤직비디오, 미공개 독점 영상 등을 이곳 YOUTUBE 채널에서 가장 먼저 만나보세요.
CJ E&M Music is a music business brand of CJ E&M, Asia's No.1 entertainment company. CJ E&M Music covers investment, production and distribution of album and also provides the best music festival and concerts. Meet the K-POP artists' brand new music videos and exclusive video clips on the official YouTube of CJ E&M Music.
Ir has been a couple of months since WUWT has checked in on the progress of solar cycle 24. Right now, the sun is in “cue ball” mode, with no large visible sunspots as seen below in the most recent Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO) photo:
Since there is a new analysis out at Pierre Gosselin’s website by Frank Bosse and Prof. Fritz Vahrenholt, I thought it would be a good time to do an update. They write:
[The sun was] rather quiet in January. The determined solar sunspot number (SSN) was 56.6, which is 71% of the mean this far into the period, calculated using the 23 previously measured solar cycles.
Figure 1: Plot of the monthly sunspot number so far for the current cycle (red line) compared to the mean solar cycle (blue line) and the similar solar cycle no. 5 (black).
The earlier peak occurring at month number 35 (fall 2011) signaled the time of the SSN maximum at the sun’s northern hemisphere. The later peaks occurring at about month no. 68 (mid 2014) are the SSN maximum for the sun’s southern hemisphere.
They also have a prediction, read about it here. Full report (in German) here.
As you can see from the plots in Figure 1, the current level of activity of solar cycle 24 seems close to that of solar cycle number 5, which occurred beginning in May 1798 and ending in December 1810 (thus falling within the Dalton Minimum). The maximum smoothed sunspot number (monthly number of sunspots averaged over a twelve-month period) observed during the solar cycle was 49.2, in February 1805 (the second lowest of any cycle to date, as a result of being part of the Dalton Minimum), and the minimum was zero.(ref: Wikipedia)
Below is what the NOAA Space Weather Prediction Center has offered this month. Sunspot count continues below the red prediction line. 10.7 cm radio flux is about at the prediction level, and the Ap geomagnetic index continues to rise, suggesting that the solar magnetic dynamo might be a bit more active, but that activity isn’t translating into increased sunspots or radio flux.
In the N. Atlantic basin not great deal, as long as the far North Atlantic (between the Reykjanes Ridge south west Iceland and Svalbard) keeps rumbling. (sorry your late brother isn’t around any longer, even if he may not had liked the above)
There are clearly no correlations here, except for the occasional random peaks.
Doc Correlation isn’t perfect , but no one expects it to be, it is the best that we have. When you, or someone else comes up with something better, that has the power to do it, I’ll pay attention. You say solar didn’t and couldn’t do. I don’t thing much of your “complicated non-linear system natural internal stochastic variation”, kind of incoherent moan that wouldn’t help much to those in the northern lands. Go on, rise to the challenge, come up with a better alternative, not much point counting the spots, if they don’t do anything. If it wasn’t for the big blast in the 1720’s, now we would have been 300 years down the slope towards the next Ice Age. It is a good thing that the ‘Nordic growl’ is picking up again in the last 5 or so years, after going ominously quiet in the previous decade. The above mentioned delay means some cooling by and in the 2020s, before we may warm up again.
it is the best that we have. When you, or someone else comes up with something better, that has the power to do it, I’ll pay attention. Correlation is one thing, physical understanding is something entirely different. What you dish out, it not ‘the best we have’. It is numerology with no basis in fact. Whether you pay attention, is irrelevant.
This is Barrack Obama responding to your recent posting alerting me to this serious situation but never forget Climate Change is real it’s serious and only by sending Washington DC gobs and gobs of your hard earned money can it be reversed. Thank you.
Ben February 11, 2016 at 11:22 am Two “here” links to German. Is there a link to English?
Well for one thing Ben If my Google Translate is correct they are hammering “Karl” The following is from the link read last sentence of first paragraph
The record year 2015 and what helped
The 2015 ended with a record: The temperature range GISS recorded +0.87 ° C anomaly compared to the reference period 1951-1981. These were further 0.13 ° C was observed over the previous year in 2014 globally. They rose strongly on ocean temperatures. A look back at a few months earlier record GISS of May 2015 shows that the global mean temperatures were 2014 then still appear lower by 0.06 ° C than in January 2016. How can that be? In summer 2015, a correction of ocean temperatures was introduced, we had, among other things here reported. The trigger: The measurement methods for detecting the surface temperatures of the oceans (SST Sea Surface Temperature) changed from 1998. Whereas previously the SST determined from ships, often by the water temperature was measured in buckets or the sucked cooling water, you went to later precise measurements over buoys. This transition was, according to the scientists to T. Karl. By NOAA, a negative distortion, which is minimized (for obvious to warm measurements of the past down to the precise measurements of the presence of upward) with corrections This measure was taken very quickly for the global soil temperature series. There is therefor not only applause in the art, as our article ” IPCC author Gerald Meehl sentenced questionable bailouts from environmental activists for heating pause: The hiatus is real and is in need of explanation ” showed. It seems very questionable to change good newer buoys measurements upward to reflect the bad old bucket measurements.
We want to assess the validity of the corrections by T. Karl shortly. As a reference, we use the most homogenous temperature range that is available for sea surface temperatures: The buoy measurements of the Argo program , which since 2004 provides fairly accurate and closely defined data error. We consider the temperatures of the upper 100m globally and comparing the uncorrected series ERSSTv3b and the realigned series ERSSTv4 (NOAA).
I am fluent in German. Despite the flaws in Google translate, it got the the gist correct. You are good to go. For another ‘hammer on Karl’ see my recent guest post here on karlization, including my comment correction since did not originally catch the 2014 NOAA graph axis label mistake. A ‘Write slower, proof more’ lesson.
ristvan February 11, 2016 at 3:30 pm
Thank you. I read your contributions, I don’t always comment. Different knowledge and skill set. respectfully michael
We are all in this together, and bring different skills/perspectives that make the whole stronger.
Thanks much for your contribution. I merely read the German originals and confirmed that despite its many linguistic errors, your provision of Goggle translate did not corrupt the main messages.
Helps to have lived in Munich for 6 years, and after a year of private tutoring having done all business ‘auf Deutsch’. Heck, I can even write it, not just read and speak it. Of course, with a Bavarian accent. ‘Ich spreche doch Bayerische’ where the doch confirms the Bayerische since not otherwise used in German. And Swiss German is still an incomprehensible dialect for me. Von Bismarck said of Bavaria, … Ah, that lies between Austria and civilization. Well, I get Austrian German no problem, no different than ‘hoch Deutsch’ (Prussian/ Berlin) or Platte Deutsche (Hamburg and north). Now Swiss German… Bavarians consider a ‘Halts Krankheit’ aka a throat disease. So now you know some of the many German dialectical jokes that were thrown around locally (and frequently) in my former part of the world. Gruess Gott.
Short cycle. With that slope, looks like it’s back to zero sometime in 2018.
It’s not a short cycle, it will be the longest in decades, likely centuries. The butterfly needs to be finished, so not before 2021/22 (the next minimum).
Ok S.. It is well known that weaker solar cycles are longer than shorter more active solar cycles… this is suggested to be due to the speed of rotation and reversal of the suns polar field.
El Niño 2015 is the outlier, though not the only liar in climate science.
El Nino represents a re-arrangement of heat (enthalpy) on the earth’s surface rather than an increase in enthalpy on the earth’s surface in the most profoundly simplest explanation of the phenomena. Surface temperature is only a poor estimate of total enthalpy. Consider two 100 degree tiles stacked on each other next to a 50 degree tile. The average “surface temperature” is 75 degrees. Now slide one of the 100 degree tiles over the 50 degree tile. The average “surface temperature” is now 100 degrees, but no heat (enthalpy) has been added to the system.
@ShrNfr
Yes it’s a re-arragnement of heat from the oceans to the atmosphere but where does it go from there? Once it’s in the atmosphere it’s going to eventually make it’s way to space. Hence it’s a next loss of heat to the system.
Neither Sunspots nor TSI are controlling whether the Earth heats, or not. There’s just too little variance in energy reaching Earth, or any other variable between Sun/Earth as far as anyone knows at this point.
“As far as anyone knows…” That means “maybe”, so it may be you’re wrong. Nobody knows so your first statement can’t be taken as fact because your second statement disqualifies it as fact.
Ever hear of that thing known as albedo? More cosmic rays, more cloud seeding, more cloud seeding, more radiation reflected back into space. Obviously not quite that simple, since the TSI also couples with the cosmic ray flux, but it is not just the amount of energy reaching the earth, it is also about the amount of energy reaching the surface of the earth. Add to the the positive feedback mechanism of ground albedo due to increased ice/snow and it adds up.
In any event the temperature dataset of the 20th century tropospheric temperatures looks a lot like a ARMA process of solar magnetic activity and NOT like a total concentration of CO2.
dp says: “Maybe”. That’s right, dp. Maybe. That’s not the first time I’ve written something poorly and I may be wrong, but prove me wrong with data. No one knows as any correlations have proved spurious to this point.
What statement/conjecture in science doesn’t tacitly end with “as far as we know at this point”?
@ Allen… and AGW didn’t manipulate the earth’s radiation balance to get the desired results they wanted in their models either??? That’s why their models are wrong. If the outgoing and incoming are very close, the entire idea of retained heat goes out the window, or space. You would never in the 1st instance have run a way greenhouse effect, and 2nd it would take centuries before any warming could be detected being that nothing else changed. Then there is the co2 record , sinks and temperature. The current sink is 150% larger than 1965. Every bit of co2 produced in 1965 would be sunk along with another 7 billion metric tons. How do you think that’s happening in light of a warming ocean (less able to absorb co2) and a much smaller tropical forests?
@ ShrNfr You seem to be arguing for Svensmark’s Hypothesis, which remains highly controversial, as does the net effect of clouds, without regard to Svensmark. We don’t know enough about clouds.
But Alan, what exactly is the TSI reaching the top of the atmosphere? Even with today’s technology and satellites, the estimate for TSI is highly varied. Now how can anyone say TSI variability has no impact on heat variability on Earth when we can’t even agree how much TSI varies in the first place?
Also, it is known that higher solar activity coincides with a shift of the total radiation emitted from the sun towards higher energy radiation. What effect will a shift from higher frequency radiation to lower frequency radiation have? My first inclination is that higher frequency light tends to penetrate deeper into water and subsequently warms it more, whereas low frequency light is more likely to only penetrate the surface where it is subsequently emitted back into the atmosphere as long wave radiation.
A correlation between the relatively small climate changes and solar variability has been suggested for decades because the correlation is obvious.
Clouds not only reflect sunlight, but the water droplets in clouds and ice absorb solar energy.
Neither Sunspots nor TSI are controlling whether the Earth heats, or not. There’s just too little variance in energy reaching Earth,
But within the total there are variances in wavelength that affect where the energy is absorbed.
I presume that you accept the LIttle Ice Age happened, and that it followed the Medieval Warm Period which itself followed the dark ages that followed the Roman Optimum.
Do you have a neat explanation for these significant climate changes which predate industrial level CO2 emissions, that does not involve the Sun?
The razor of William of Oakham shaves the hair off of many a hoary model. We simply live around a slightly variable star. Sorry Mr. Robertson.
Alan R
We do know quite a bit about ozone in the Antarctic and GCR. There is a strong cooling effect caused by interactions between CR and ozone. This is independent of Svensmark’s ideas. Prof Lu at the University of Waterloo has written several papers on this and defended the conclusions pretty well I think. He also demonstrated the chemistry and physics involved here in Waterloo in the lab.
As you are probably aware CERN is investigating further the Svensmark effect after confirming that the effect was real and larger than expected. Both mechanisms work, and can explain most temperature changes over the past century.
In short, the cause is solar. Neither depends on TSI as the variable.
BFL, et al, Let’s cut to the chase: Where are the Sunspot/climate correlations back to 1700? Decadal scales don’t cut it. What about TSI and climate? Any other Solar metric? ——- Ian W says: Do you have a neat explanation for these significant climate changes which predate industrial level CO2 emissions, that does not involve the Sun? —————— No. I don’t have one involving the Sun, either. Nor have I seen any correlation with TSI, or any Solar parameter, that doesn’t fall apart at some point. —- The whole “it’s the Sun” thing is unproven and highly controversial. Maybe I missed the proof… take me to task and prove me wrong. Let’s see the proof. If you are right, it shouldn’t be hard to prove me wrong… I’m just a man in the world, claiming no credentials, or such beyond layman’s interest.
Ps I’ve rephrased the argument somewhat from planetary heating to global climate change, but it’s the same case. Come up with definitive proof that the Sun is the driver of climate change and you’ll win a prize. Figure out why we swing from glaciation to interglacials and you’ll win a prize for that, too.
I always checked boundary conditions to see if statements like ” There’s just too little variance in energy reaching Earth, or any other variable between Sun/Earth as far as anyone knows at this point.” are justified.
The simple refutation is if dead sun – frozen earth, if supernova sun – cinder earth
Crispin in Waterloo says: GCRs. ———— Thanks. For me, studies related to GCR hold great promise for explaining many of the great unknowns in climate research. The Sun is likely the strongest influence, but there are still so many unknowns, such as the variances with GCRs, themselves. Such drivers as the Solar System’s oscillation above/below the galactic plane and movement through the galaxy are known, but still we are in shallow waters. At this point, GCR research is interesting, mostly unknown, but bringing us closer to the truth of things than we were before.
My conjecture remains, we don’t know enough yet, to definitively say, “it is the Sun” (or anything else, imho.)
Lawrence Todd February 11, 2016 at 3:11 pm
I always checked boundary conditions … The simple refutation is if dead sun – frozen earth, if supernova sun – cinder earth …………… That’s quite a context. Aren’t you the clever one. The planet will likely have lost all its Hydrogen long before either of those events.
I think Vincent Courtillot and his buddies might have something to say about that.
“Neither Sunspots nor TSI are controlling whether the Earth heats, or not.”
Alan;
You are right. Sunspots themselves do not control anything; they are storms that vary in number with the strength of the solar electromagnetic field. The more spots there are, the stronger the field; the fewer spots the weaker the field. The solar field, itself, however, probably DOES influence temperatures on the Earth. I believe that there were experiments (CLOUD) done at CERN that pretty well confirmed the hypothesis that variation in the Sun’s electromagnetic field also caused variation in cloud formation in the Earth’s atmosphere from cosmic rays. A stronger field deflects the rays; a weaker field allows them to penetrate deeper into the atmosphere.
TSI, including infrared (heat) radiation measured at the Earth’s surface, will vary depending with the amount of cloud cover shielding the surface of the Earth from solar heat. Additionally, cloud cover also reflects solar radiation back toward space. Sooo, TSI at the Earth’s surface DOES affect whether the Earth heats or not. If you do not believe that this is true, then how is it possible for the seasons to change from Summer to Winter in the northern and southern hemispheres? As far as we can determine, this happens when either greater or lesser amounts of direct sunlight reach the surface of the Earth due to it’s inclination. Even a tiny variance in solar infrared radiation will, over time, affect heating or cooling. You have to think of it as a sum of money in the bank gaining compound interest. The longer a positive or negative variation in TSI lasts, the greater will be cumulative amount of cooling or heating over time.
Alan– You are correct that TSI hasn’t changed that much during the current weak solar cycle, however, during weak solar cycles, solar UV radiation declines, as do solar winds.
The Svensmark Effect postulates that reduced solar winds allow more Galactic Cosmic Rays to enter earth’s lower troposphere, which nucleate more inorganic compounds that form cloud seeds and create more cloud cover. This increased cloud cover increases earth’s albedo, which reflects more solar energy out to space leading to global cooling.
It’s a widely held belief that the 4 Grand Solar Minimum events (Wolf, Sporer, Maunder and Dalton) which occurred between 1280~1820 were responsible for the Little Ice Age, which began and ended during the course of these 4 GSMs.
During strong solar cycles, the opposite effect occurs, leading to global warming.
The strongest 63-yr string of solar cycles in 11,400 years occurred between 1933~1996, which may account for a substantial portion of 20th century warming. It’s also interesting to note that when these strong solar cycles ended in 1996, so did the global warming trend….
It’ll be interesting to see what happens to global temps when another Grand Solar Minimum occurs, which many astrophysicists think will happen from around 2030.
Not much water on your planet then? With its three states and two-edged thermodynamic sword. Better hope the bottom one doesn’t take a little swipe, it’s much sharper.
Don’t know where you got that from, Alan. . There are many good scientists out there who are researching the link between Earth’s climate and solar activity.
“Figure out why we swing from glaciation to interglacials”
Wrong question. Figure out why the rise and fall is the shape it is. The answer is possibly water’s massive latent heat differential either side of the liquid state + albedo change. Little to do with CO2 which follows along for the ride ~800 years later. The rest is per Milanković, the signal of which is NOT that shape.
El nino and adjustments. NOAA published a global average temperature that was +3 F degrees warmer in 1997 than now. That’s 1.5 C. Were they wrong then, now, or was the very recent past much colder? I am perplexed as to how 2015 is the hottest year on record. There is a discontinuity in the records. They compared 1997 with previous adjusted records, then adjusted all of those records again. The original records are in a landfill. If you had followed this since 2001 you’d know that they didn’t share how they adjusted the “lost” records.
It is my view that temperatures have been falling for 1 of 2 reasons. 1) AGW works like they say it does, and the temperature even by IPCC methods falls below the lowest modeled number. Which would be cooling even in the face of rising co2 levels . Or 2) the global average temperature in 1997 is correct, and it is apparent in satellite records, and the temperature has dropped more than 1.5 C .
Click on ‘globe’ & drag to rotate; Click on ‘globe’ – green spot gives – Position, Wind direction & speed, Temperature. Click on ‘about’ for more details.
Temperature colour key for surface layer. Blue = 0 to-30°C, Red = -30 to -60°C Green = 0 to +10°C, yellow/green = +10 to +20°C, Brown = +20 to +60°C
Without doubting the thrust of your arguement , Isave , I would like to take this opportunity to bring up a point that has been concerning me about the eart.nullschool images .They are visually stunning and have been shown here frequently lately (and have started to appear in mainstream media) but I am a bit uncertain how much is based on actual measurement and how much depends on modelling. For example take the disclaimer the presenter makes about CO2 surface concentration : – “about CO2 concentrations
While implementing the visualization of CO2 surface concentration, I noticed the NASA GEOS-5 model reports a global mean concentration that differs significantly from widely reported numbers. For example, from the run at 2015-11-23 00:00 UTC, the global mean is only 368 ppmv whereas CO2 observatories report concentrations closer to 400 ppmv. GEOS-5 was constructed in the 2000s, so perhaps the model does not account for accumulation of atmospheric CO2 over time? This is simply speculation. I’m just not certain.
To bring the GEOS-5 results closer to contemporary numbers, I have added a uniform offset of +32 ppmv, increasing the global mean to 400 ppmv. This is not scientifically valid, but it does allow the visualization to become illustrative of the discussion occurring today around atmospheric CO2. Without question, I would welcome a more rigorous approach or an explanation why the GEOS-5 model produces the data that it does.
Also worth mentioning, the GEOS-5 site contains the following disclaimer: Please note that these predictions are experimental and are produced for research purposes only. Use of these forecasts for purposes other than research is not recommended.” – It does not seem to be relying on OCO2 data , which is surely the latest and best available.
So how much of the Earth.nullschool imager is based on real land or satellite observations and how much on modelling?
Just now on the EarthWindMap I green spotted the temp where I live, in a rural community. It gave a reading that was 7 degrees lower than the official local temp. I did the same using a similar commercial product called MeteoEarth and the temp it gave was .5 degree out.
It isn’t still warming. Does that make it easier to understand?
Tom in Florida, ……………………. freaking arthritic fingers sometimes don’t work so well.
Marcus, perhaps your GOD is not hearing you because you are not speaking the Glo-Bull Warming language. And what language might this GOD understand? Hint: Money talks. Science walks. And blind faith speaks loudest of all.
Marcus: You COULD move to someplace balmier like Halifax or Toronto. Or even to Florida if you don’t mind putting up with Americans,venomous snakes, 3 meter carnivorous lizards in your backyard, and mosquitoes 12 months of the year.
You do make a point that needs to be made repeatedly. ANY change in climate — warmer or colder — is going to have winners and losers– not just losers.
Do not listen Marcus! Those gators are like big pussycats, snakes hear you coming and go the other way if you stomp around loudly, and there are almost zero mosquitos at the beach or in well sprayed snow-bird communities. As for Americans, that can be hard to locate amongst the hoards of Canadians snow birds this time of year. But you can spot natives some if you know how to look: They are the ones who occasionally obey traffic laws, and they rarely drive a huge bus pulling a car with seventeen bikes attached to it.
What is the impact historically? What is the lag period before surface temps reflect the change?
This is a graphic from one of my recent articles. I have plotted CET from 1538 ( my reconstruction 1538 to 1658) against sunspot numbers.
Clearly Ther is some sort of relationship ( coincidental or otherwise) with low numbers of sunspots at the end of the 17th century.
The relationship between sun spots and low temperatures at other times is much less clear cut.
So do extended periods of solar inactivity result in extended periods of cold? I am not convinced but are open to the arguments of those who have studied the relationship in depth
I should have mentioned that the sun spot record in any meaningful form commenced in 1610 .
Consequently no inference should be placed on apparent lack of sunspots/cold temperatures prior to this date
Tonyb
I’d say the correlation holds well for the Dalton Minimum as well.
Curious that the Volcanism plot is missing Agung and El-Chichon, El-Chichon in particular was a major player.
I’d say the correlation holds well for the Dalton Minimum as well.
Not really. Mean CET Temperatures for the 1780-1800 period are virtually the same as for the 1800-1820 period and the mean temperature for the entire 19th century is not appreciably different to the Dalton minimum mean temperature.
I think you’re seeing what you want to see.
Tony, thanks for posting that. My mind is open to causal relationships like solar wind/cosmic rays/ albedo (Svensmark), shift in UV intensity/ozone…but the trained statistician in me suspects spurious correlation around the Maunder minimum. Wrote about spurious correlation using a magnificent MIT example in The Arts of Truth, statistics chapter. US. Sec. Agriculture under Obama used U. Iowa statistics to claim corn ethanol had reduced US gas prices $1.37 in 2011 from what they would otherwise have been. Absurd on its face, as the ethanol blendwall is 10% and US gasoline did not cost $13.70/ gallon in 2011. The same spurious correlation also proves that if the US had stopped using ethanol in gasoline in 2011, then UK unemployment would have dropped 47%. The topical relevance to CAGW is obvious. U. Iowa researchers are as motivated to support corn ethanol as mainstream climate scientists are to support CAGW. And the motivation is simple. Money.
Tony – thanks
Tonyb,
I have looked with quite detail into temperatures of the past.
The strongest correlation of temperatures is with Earth’s axial tilt (obliquity). The second strongest correlation is that of cold periods with periods of clustering of grand solar minima following two different cycles that are not always equally intense, the 1000 years cycle and the 2500 years cycle. LIA was a period when both hit a low almost simultaneously, but previously recognized strongly cold periods follow this pattern. So while temperatures do not appear to follow solar activity, grand solar minima appear to induce strong cooling when they cluster, and when they end, a natural return to warmer temperatures takes place over 2-4 centuries.
@ Javier… try convincing the IPCC and associates that there was even a LIA. (Worldwide) Their argument co2 levels didn’t change, therefore neither did the temperature. Else they have a problem explaining a drop in co2 and why that happened.
As to the solar weather, they say that “sunny weather eludes so far all attempts at prediction” (Google translate) They attack Karl’s SST modification among other things.
Please correct if I’m wrong, this is a question: the accumulated heat in the oceans being released in the current El Nino is resulting in atmospheric temperature rise, which will continue until that also dissipates/radiates back out to space. Is that right? Is it thought that a quiet sun will not restore the lost oceanic heat as rapidly as a more active sun?
That is the only way energy can get from the ocean to space (by first warming the atmosphere). If the surface temperature returns to the pre-impulse level and the oceans return to a La Niña temperatures then it means most if not all energy from the El Niño impulse has left the earth system. Since the oceans are not an energy source but an energy storage medium I don’t know how the El Niño phase of the ENSO cycle can be anything but a cooling event – La Niña being the warming event.
Cant ocwans be warmed by vulcanism….ie a heat source to Air?
That is the only way energy can get from the ocean to space (by first warming the atmosphere).
Actually, a lot of energy is radiated directly to space without heating the atmosphere. link
>the accumulated heat in the oceans being released in the current El Nino is resulting in atmospheric temperature rise, which will continue until that also dissipates/radiates back out to space.
Mostly right? My understanding is that normally winds near the equator blow East to West — Trade Winds. That causes warm water near Asia to be pushed down and be replaced with equally warm water blown in from the East. But on the East side of the Pacific, the wind driven conveyor is pulling up deep, rather cold water off South America. So there’s a temperature gradient form colder to warmer across the Equatorial Pacific. Every now and then, equatorial winds reverse for a while and blow from the West. That spreads warm water East to South America. Then the winds reverse back to more normal Easterlies. But it takes rather a while for the warm water to be pushed back to the West. So during and after an El Nino event, the tropical Pacific Ocean is warmer than usual and of course it would be radiating more than usual heat to space. A lot of the subsequent cooling comes from upwelling of colder water off South America and its redistribution across the tropical Pacific.
Good question, answer not so clear. Oceans are warmed by SWR (visible sunlight) as LWR (infrared) cannot penetrate and at most causes increased surface evaporation–which cools. But this simple statement ignores the vertical and horizontal movement/ exchange of ocean heat due to forces we do not fully understand. Consider ENSO. Sun heats tropical Pacific, and the Hadley cell induced tradewinds pile that warm water up in the western tropical Pacific. Now when that ‘pile’ gets big enough, it sloshes back east as a Kelvin wave. Accompanied by a weakening or even reversal of the tradewinds. El Nino. Runs its sloshing course, and the reverse sets in, La Nina. Bathtubs can teach climate sciece some useful things. Over to Bob Tisdale for details.
Sunspots are magnetic storms or turbulence, so if they have a relationship to TSI, wouldn’t it be an indication of the current overall level of energy in the sun?
Waiting for the warming. As a canadian living north of the 60th parallel I too wish for AGW, it would feel so good. Unfortunately it looks like the only way to prevent the return of the great ice sheets would be a solar mirror focused on Hudson Bay. Not sure if direct sunlight or infrared only would work best, but if the bay stays frozen Year round,everything north of New York is doomed.
More on topic, what is the most likely lime lag for heat cycling through the ocean?. Our remarkably stable climate is regulated by these massive bodies of water, so what length of solar low activity would it take to see a measurable global temperature drop? Assuming we can calculate such a metric.
Leif. I haven’t seen a Livingstone, Penn & Svalgaard graph for a year or so. Initially it was going down in a straight line but then started to curve away from the 1500? gauss? line. Any up to date graph available ? Prognostications thereon ?
One thing is pretty sure. After 5 years we are much wiser. If the temperature does not stat to increase in 5 years, it is finally a good enough proof that CO2 is not responsible for the high temperatures of today. If the temperature declines – let us say – 0.2…0.3 degrees, its is strong evidence of cosmic forces: sun, cosmic rays, cosmic dust even. If the temperature stays at the present level, then we need new theories.
That makes a lot of sense. If true, though, can you imagine how horrible winter would be? You’re welcome Canada.
Nonsence… Co2 does not offset the suns energy, either by warming or cooling, the temperature of Co2 in the atmosphere is regulated by the temperature of the enviorment it is found in, Co2 is not an energy source, it does not double energy when exposed to it, it is a trace gas, it is a low lying gas that plant life has evolved over millions of years to take advantage of it’s properties, solar energy, UV and Xrays from the sun, along with the strong electromagnitic forces from the suns polar field effects planetary climates, a prolonged solar minimum will reduce all the warming effects of an active sun and it will have a large reduction in temperatures the longer solar minimums are… there’s a long solar minimum coming up soon and you will see this effect for yourself.
The right people said we were entering into one of the weakest solar maximums and they were correct, all these data adjustments taking place to cover up an on going planetary cooling phase will bring a political shitstorm with it once people begin to see bodies on their streets due to freezing temperatures that these deep solar minimums bring…
Sparks: Not happening. Do you think that somebody gives s… how many people are freezing to death? Look on Taiwan few days ago – 89 people death because freezing temperature. Somebody cares that in UK few thousand people die because of cold? Same in Europe, USA. Cold is taking death toll from people on bottom of wealth pyramid. Nobody cares.
sorry for posting sort of off topic. Does anybody know how somebody would go about calibrating 3 instruments, miles apart, if you are trying to detect tiny movements in time and space ? presumably you would have to calibrate for what you are looking for ? all this cosmology stuff sometimes seems to me to be like the climate change stuff.
calibrating gravity pulses – part of it is you have a normal range of variation, then both instruments detect a big pulse at the same time.
the resolution – a thousandth of the diameter of an electron or whatever – that i cannot figure out. you sure have to add a lot of gain to that signal.
” Oh look! There’s one! I saw one! At least, I think it was one.”
Yes. I understand. First, you have to isolate the interferometry mirrors from any other source of noise, as much as possile. This was done by suspending them in a vacuum using fine glass threads, glass being amorphous, and fine glass threads relatively flexible (fiber optics) so quite vibration damping compared to the weight of suspended mirror. Next use a high frequency beam split laser to send half of the coherent beam down each of two perpendicular arms for 2.5 miles, then back after reflecting off the suspension damped mirrors. Round trip for each half beam, 5 miles. If no gravity wave, the return beams recombine and cancel at the splitter. No resulting light. If gravity waves, then the two beams return out of phase at the splitter thanks to stretched spacetime ( accentuated by the perpendicular arms per general relativity theory) and there will be some light photons leaking beyond the splitter. A phototube measures those as the strength of the gravity wave signal. NYT today has a nice graphic on this from CalTech. Now build two of these as far apart as possible. 1. Cancels local vibrational residue. They should both get a gravity wave signal. 2. Delta signal timing (speed of light atomic clocks are no big deal anymore, else GPS would not work) probes the other general relativity gravity wave prediction, that spacetime gravity waves only travel at the speed of light. Both predictions confirmed by this event, and to the predicted values. Bravo for science here. Another BIG confirmation of general relativity. Now if we could only unify general relativity with quantum theory…
I dunno, you do something and get a result not sure you should attribute it to what you are looking for.
the mirror suspension assembly was designed and built here in scotland i believe. nice to see such a big international collaboration come together. thanks for that explanation ristvan, much clearer than anything i have seen or heard in the mainstream media (no surprise there).
yes, sorry, it is all probably correct, yet I consider trying to measure a thing from inside a thing has got to be really difficult.
“Solar cycles are numbered from a minimum to a minimum since Cycle 1 of 1755/1766, the maximum was in 1761. And now we come to the cycle No. 24 which had its absolute minimum in late 2008 and should have its maximum around 2013. According to the law of GO (Gnevyshev-Oh) an odd-numbered cycle is more active and thus more sunspots that the number is even cycle preceding it. This allows to have an idea of solar activity cycles odd.
But during these 23 cycles, the law of GO was raped by three pairs of odd-even cycles. Those are the cycle No. 4-5 so the solar cycle from 1785 to 1798 and from 1798 to 1810, the cycles No. 8-9 so the solar cycle from 1834 to 1843 and from 1843 to 1856 and then the cycles No. 22- 23 from 1985 to 1996 and from 1996 to 2007 is because contrary to the law of the GO odd-numbered cycle is more active than the preceding even cycle.
If as was indicated Mr Hathaway (NASA, member of the panel forecasting the solar cycle) cycle No. 25 could be one of the lowest in the last century then there will be violation of the law between the GO N cycles 24 and 25 °.
Violations of the law GO place near a time when the orbital motion of the Sun around the center of gravity is retrograde and when the orbital angular momentum of the Sun decreases a lot and quickly. At these times there was approximately an alignment of Jupiter-Sun-Saturn-Uranus-Neptune so the center of gravity is near the center of the Sun and reverse with an alignment of the Sun-Jupiter-Saturn-Uranus-Neptune around 6 years after the more or nearly one year. So a quick change in the distance between the Sun and the center of gravity. Because when Saturn-Uranus-Neptune are on the same side of the Sun while Jupiter has a shorter orbital period varies very quickly the distance between the Sun and the center of gravity.
Below you have the position of the gas planets at two points given during solar cycles that have violated the law of GO. For the first two where the date is less than the beginning of the numbering of solar cycles, the law of GO has been raped but can not Verily know. As we see the alignment of gaseous planets are all on the same side and between 5 and 7 years later, Jupiter is on the other side of the Sun and the other gas planets are the opposite side of Jupiter.”
Position of the planets in 2023 and 2030 is when the odd cycle No. 25 violated the law GO
Don’t know about the 200 years, plot cycle 14 apr 1902 to apr 1911 against jan 2009 to now, monthly sunspots…….almost exactly the same! Cycle 12 is pretty similar also.
Now that we have detected gravity waves, could we work on the lagged or indirect correlation and causation between solar cycle waves and global temps via oceans. Dismissing the link between the Dalton Minimum and global cooling could be costly for those who pay for monumental policy mistakes, like planning and spending for the opposite outcome like we have today. Most other cases of monumental policy failure involve the old ‘wait and react’ pattern of doing nothing and then spending a lot on management by crisis. There are far fewer cases of large scale policy failure involving spending on a crisis in a complete opposite swing of outcomes.
Regarding the nature of the relationship between grand minimums in solar activity and cooler periods in climate, why think causation rather than merely being a non-dominating contributor?
For instance the LIA being caused by the Dalton minimum is weak because the energy variances from the sun are very very small for such a relatively large effect. Also, the timing of the LIA start is arguably before the Dalton minimum start.
That’s right. Maunder correlation isn’t there and isn’t strong enough to matter.
Look at planetay orbital data for the time of the Maunder minimum, there were large changes, it is believed that these orbital changes effected the suns polar field throwing it out of a regular cycle and prevented it from reversing completely for decades, this produced a phase of very weak solar activity… on earth this translated into a known cool period… hypothetically, if the suns polar field can be knocked out of a regular reversal and it’s polarities remain at the geographical poles for extended periods of time, then it’s not inconceivable that this process could cause full blown ice ages…
“We therefore propose that the phenomenon is best described as the sum of two components – one regular and cyclical and the other irregular and random.”
Only one? How does a rescaled range analysis of the residuals of a secondary effect determine that if there is weak attenuation (with harmonics) of a dominant hysteretic primary evolution going on?
If the warming is the result of oceans releasing stored heat then you’d expect to see a concurrent reduction in ocean heat content, right?
The opposite is the case though. Sea surface temperatures and ocean heat content are also increasing and are at record high levels.
How can oceans release heat without cooling?
“The opposite is the case though. Sea surface temperatures and ocean heat content are also increasing and are at record high levels.” nonsense.
It tells us that warm years happen during solar maximums, they always do, there was no surprise, there was still a lot of solar activity and enough to effect heavily doctored data, but as many people have mentioned this enso warm spike is energy leaving the atmosphere and it will not be there as we head into a long solar minimum, so there are still no surprises happening…
Dwr544… this is currently solar cycle 24, it is a peak of activity where a maximum number of sunspots occur, this is a weak solar maximum and activity is declining toward a solar minimum where there few to no sunspots and minimum solar activity and the polarities will be at the suns geographic poles, is that clear enough for you to understand, it is a bit tricky :)
“Solar cycle 24 activity is the lowest in nearly 200 years and was particularly low in January 2016.
Despite this we saw the warmest January on record for both surface and satellite data sets.
What does this tell us about the effects of solar cycles on global climate?”
Not much if we don’t look at any data prior to January, nor if we don’t understand the solar data from January.
SORCE TSI for January averaged 1361.2892 W/m^2/day. What does that mean to you? (That was a general question for everyone – not picking on DWR54.)
Does anyone here know how high TSI has to be and for how long for the earth to warm? or conversely, cool under low TSI? I asked and answered those questions while researching and developing my solar supersensitivity-accumulation model, work I did July 2014 to August 2015.
The answer means TSI is now just about to slip below the cooling line, and it will stay there most of the time until the next solar cycle rises to its maximum. We have a double whammy now with the La Nina occurring whilst the sun isn’t active enough to warm, so it’s going to get colder this year, and 2016 will not be a record temperature year as a result.
Today’s SSTs and OHC are the result of today’s TSI, but moreso of accumulated energy from high TSI stored in the ocean during the past, so trying to infer that today’s temps should only be proportionate to today’s TSI would be a mistake, and therefore missing the main story.
The recent El Nino started in earnest in March 2015, one month after the smoothed TSI peak for SC24 in February. Without the TSI spike last year, the 2014 El Nino would’ve fizzled into nothing, not blown up into a stronger ENSO as it did in 2015. It’s not a coincidence that 2014-15 were warm years while TSI was high. SORCE TSI rankings by year (2013 & 2014 with incomplete SORCE data)
How are reconciling the 1997 NOAA record with today’s as being the warmest? Additionally, even if solar activity is not a factor or is a huge coincidence, then AGW is definitely not a valid theory, the current temperature is below the lowest modeled forecast. So much so that I can say since 1998 temps have been falling. At this point it is just a matter of time to see. Global cooling is a concern, warming isnt. We haven’t had a decade like the 1970’s. Food rationing was on the table before back to back super harvests in the US ushered in by warmer weather. And that wasn’t a major downturn. What do you think this author of this article is saying? And which do you think I think is the most likely, AGW or solar activity? It’s hard to ignore that if you think with reason that temps have fallen by 1.5 C and that solar activity has fallen that there isn’t some connection. Remember there has been no reduction in the output of co2, in fact year over year increases of over a billion metric tons.
the real climate change a cooling sun. ice age? of course by the time it gets really going gore and obama and most of us will be in the ground when the great sheet of ice grinds us up! climate hustle mon full display!
After reading the comments, I was thinking they should have had this debate BEFORE they concluded the earth was heating up because of man, and taxing CO2 would save the planet.
There will be public and media demands for an explanation as to why the planet is abruptly cooling. It is possible to wave away 18 years of no warming with heat is hiding in the ocean. Abrupt cooling will be a game changer.
The politicians will abandon the cult of CAGW when it becomes obvious that the entire IPCC science was incorrect. More than 75% of the rise in atmospheric CO2 was due to the warming of the oceans and increased deep core release of CH4, as opposed to anthropogenic CO2 emissions.
Almost the entire warming in the last 150 years was due to solar cycle changes, as opposed to the rise in atmospheric CO2. Double trump. Humans did not cause the rise in atmospheric CO2 and the rise in atmospheric CO2 did not cause the warming.
The efforts to reduce anthropogenic CO2 emissions achieved almost nothing and were a purposeless waste of money. Trillions of dollars have been wasted fighting ‘climate change’.
The problem which must be address is to this point unimaginable to the public and the politicians: Abrupt cooling and what will happen to the earth when the solar cycle restarts. Does anyone remember the 18 burn marks on two different continents at different latitudes that coincide in time with the Younger Dryas abrupt cooling event?
The cult of CAGW are in denial they know something extraordinary is happening to the earth’s climate, it is starting to abruptly cool.
La Nina expected in next months for the first time since 2012 NEW YORK (Reuters) – Even as the El Nino weather phenomenon continues to impact global temperatures and crops, its counterpart La Nina is increasingly expected to emerge in the coming months for the first time in four years.
It is obvious based on observations that the solar cycle has been interrupted. There are cycles of abrupt climate change in the paleo record that correlate with abrupt changes to the sun. What is now happening to the sun is what causes a Heinrich event.
The solar cycle is not slowing down. The graph of the average field strength of a sunspot on the surface of the sun stopped dropping (plateaued due to a mathematical and physical reason) as the minimum field strength of a sunspot on the surface of the sun is around 1500 Gauss. The graph stopped dropping linearly dropping when the minimum field strength of a portion of the set of sunspots on the surface of the sun has below 1500 Gauss. At that point only sunspots with a field strength greater than 1500 Gauss are measured.
As the solar process unfolded, long lasting large sunspots (last up to a month) were replaced by tiny short lived pores (disappear in less than a week) as the magnetic field strength of the magnetic flux tubes that rise up from the tachocline to form sunspots on the surface of the sun decreased.
As the magnetic field strength of the magnetic flux tubes continued to decrease the magnetic flux tubes that rise up to the surface of the sun were torn apart by convection forces in the solar convection zone so what has left on the surface of the sun was a region of higher magnetic flux but no visible sunspot.
The Younger Dryas is the last Heinrich event. The Younger Dryas is the name for an abrupt cooling event that occurred 12,800 years ago, at which time the planet when from interglacial warm to glacial cold with 75% of the cooling occurring in less than a decade. The YD abrupt cooling period lasted for 1200 years. The YD event occurred when summer solar insolation at 65N was maximum which is one of more than a dozen different observations/analysis results that support the assertion that summer solar insolation at 65N is not the cause of the glacial/interglacial cycle or the cause of cyclic abrupt climate change.
Reduced solar activity as a trigger for the start of the Younger Dryas? It is generally assumed that changes in ocean circulation forced the abrupt climate changes during the Late Pleistocene, including the Younger Dryas event. Recently, however, it was proposed that variations in solar irradiance could have played a much more prominent role in forcing Pleistocene climate changes. For climate fluctuations during the Holocene the role of solar variability as an important forcing factor becomes more accepted. Furthermore, two physical mechanisms were recently published that explain how relatively small changes in solar irradiance could have had a strong impact on the climate system. We discuss the possibility that an abrupt reduction in solar irradiance triggered the start of the Younger Dryas (William: The mechanism by which an interruption to the solar cycle causes abrupt climate change is not a change in TSI, although it will be interesting to see how much TSI drops during the current cycle change.) and we argue that this is indeed supported by three observations: (1) the abrupt and strong increase in residual 14 C at the start of the Younger Dryas that seems to be too sharp to be caused by ocean circulation changes alone, (2) the Younger Dryas being part of an 2500 year quasi-cycle also found in the 14C record that is supposedly of solar origin, (3) the registration of the Younger Dryas in geological records in the tropics and the mid-latitudes of the Southern Hemisphere. Moreover, the proposed two physical mechanisms could possibly explain how the North Atlantic thermohaline circulation was perturbed through an increase in precipitation together with iceberg in fluxes. In addition, the full magnitude of the Younger Dryas cooling as evidenced by terrestrial records in Europe could be explained. We conclude that a solar triggering of the Younger Dryas is a valid option that should be studied in detail with climate models.
Davis and Taylor: “Does the current global warming signal reflect a natural cycle”
…We found 342 natural warming events (NWEs) corresponding to this definition, distributed over the past 250,000 years …. …. The 342 NWEs contained in the Vostok ice core record are divided into low-rate warming events (LRWEs; < 0.74oC/century) and high rate warming events (HRWEs; ≥ 0.74oC /century) (Figure). … …. "Recent Antarctic Peninsula warming relative to Holocene climate and ice – shelf history" and authored by Robert Mulvaney and colleagues of the British Antarctic Survey ( Nature , 2012, doi:10.1038/nature11391),reports two recent natural warming cycles, one around 1500 AD and another around 400 AD, measured from isotope (deuterium) concentrations in ice cores bored adjacent to recent breaks in the ice shelf in northeast Antarctica. ….
The peculiar solar cycle 24 – where do we stand? Solar cycle 24 has been very weak so far. It was preceded by an extremely quiet and long solar minimum. Data from the solar interior, the solar surface and the heliosphere all show that cycle 24 began from an unusual minimum and is unlike the cycles that preceded it. We begin this review of where solar cycle 24 stands today with a look at the antecedents of this cycle, and examine why the minimum preceding the cycle is considered peculiar (§ 2). We then examine in § 3 whether we missed early signs that the cycle could be unusual. § 4 describes where cycle 24 is at today.
There will be public and media demands for an explanation as to why the planet is abruptly cooling. Except that it is not. What we should demand is an explanation for why it is not cooling.
And your ‘solar cycle interruption’ is just nonsense.
No, the official sites like JPL and Goddard didn’t . Cycle 23 and 24 were suppose to look exactly like cycle 22 and 21. In fact I remember them talking about the magnetic field strength and diapoles being exceptionally strong leading to a very active cycle 23. Isvalgaard that is revising the past. They didn’t know and it was a surprise. I’m sure that if the sun hadn’t of gone quite the global warming debate would have been over. Did I know? , sort of, it could have been cycle 25 , 26 or longer. The sun has its own agenda and reacts to different things we haven’t figured out yet. Otherwise the pretty graphs of the forecast of cycle 23 would have looked a lot different.
What you are providing a link to above is an amalgam of different frequencies as it no longer possible to see sunspots in the standard single frequency. In the very recent past (last solar cycles) sunspots were clearly visible in the single frequency view. They are no longer visible in the single frequency view. You are ignoring that obvious observational change in addition to the fact that large long lasting sunspots have been replaced by tiny short lived sunspots which are called pores.
The silly solar gate propping up of the sunspot number by NOAA that is going on is pathetic and purposeless. I do not understand why NOAA is attempting to hide the obvious observational fact that sunspots are disappearing which is different than there are less sunspot groups and less sunspots on the surface of the sun. Propping up the sunspot number does not change what is happening to the sun.
As I have stated there are hundreds of astronomical observations and solar system observations that support the assertion that the sun and stars are significantly different than the standard model.
You are completely unaware of the observations (anomalies and paradoxes) in question which explains why you repeat an incorrect theory emphatically that is disproved by observations.
Obviously observations (am asserting there will be abrupt cooling of the planet and an announcement that the sun is in a weird state) will prove which one of us is correct. A scientist changes his or her mind when observations no longer support a theory. Science is not a debate where people pick sides and have an emotional attachment to one theory or another.
The solar cycle has been interrupted and the planet will abruptly cool. There is a physical reason related to the mechanisms and how the sun has changed and is changing that explains why there was a delay in cooling.
The observational fact that there has been an increase in jet stream speed is one of the observational signs that the cooling has started and is one of the cooling mechanisms. There is increased evaporation of cooling of the ocean when wind speed increases.
If you had read Svensmarks’ book Chilling Stars: Cosmic Climate Change which you have not you would understand the greatest amount of cooling is in the latitudes 40 to 60 which is where the cooling has started.
A scientist changes his or her mind when observations no longer support a theory But a pseudo-scientist like you never does that, right? I mean, if you understand everything perfectly from a holistic view [as you claim you do], changing your mind would not make sense.
I have asserted that the majority of the warming in the last 150 years is due to solar cycle changes. I have also asserted the solar cycle has been interrupted. If both assertions are correct the planet will abruptly cool.
In science theories are proven correct or incorrect by falsifiable predictions compared to observations.
Leif has asserted that the sun cannot significantly change and that solar changes have almost no affect on the earth’s temperature. (I am curious if there will be a significant change in TSI when as the solar cycle interruption proceeds, see below.)
Leif do you have an explanation for the Solar Convection Zone Paradox? Have you though about it?
Solar Convection Zone Paradox Recent helioseismology analysis has determined that motion in the solar convection zone is a hundred times smaller than expected based on the standard solar model.
The paradox is why is motion in the solar convection zone a hundred times less than modeled? If the physics of convection is not changed/correct, as the energy output of the sun is known.
The implications of this finding is there is a non convection mechanism which in turn logically requires a non fusion reaction (the only method for the fusion reaction to transfer energy is radiation which takes millions of years to move through the radiative zone and then the radiation transfers energy by convection motion through the convection zone to the surface of the sun) that is transferring energy from the core of the sun to the surface of the sun.
Gizon says “The unexpectedly small velocities measured using helioseismology are the most noteworthy helioseismology result since the launch of HMI”. Adds Birch, “There is no clear way to reconcile the observations and theory”. Gizon then concludes “This result not only sheds a new light on the Sun – but also on our current inability to understand one of the most fundamental physical processes in the Sun and stars: convection”.
The finding that convection motion in the solar convection zone is a hundred times slower than expected is one of the hundreds of astronomical observations (There are at least a dozen or so in our solar system in addition to the very recent solar convection paradox such as the variance of comet coma for first pass comets: Why do new comets (those approaching the sun for the first time) loss two to three magnitudes in average brightness, while old comets show little evidence for further brightness decreases? Why do comets display large comas at very great distance from the Sun where the solar vaporization is expected to be small?) standard model.
The logical implications of the finding that motion in the solar convection zone is a hundred times slower than modeled (accepting the result and assuming the physics of convection is correct so the convection motion would be 100 times faster if the primary/only method of heat transfer was convection), is energy is being transfer from the solar core to the solar surface by a non convection mechanism.
This new mechanism would enable a specific reaction change (non fusion reaction, the reaction that is creating the coronal holes and the solar wind) in the solar core to cause an almost immediate change in solar irradiance which is interesting. I am curious if TSI will change when the sun is in the new state.
Unexpectedly slow motions below the Sun’s surface New observations of seismic oscillations on the Sun’s surface from NASA’s SDO mission challenge our understanding of interior solar dynamics
Plasma flows with less than one metre per second The team of scientists from the Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research, Princeton University, NASA’s Goddard Flight Center and New York University was able to determine the flow velocities at a depth of 55000 kilometres, which is eight percent of the solar radius. Surprisingly, the flow velocities of the plasma were found to be less than a few meters per second. Gizon puts this into perspective saying “This is a hundred times less than predicted by numerical models of solar convection”. Gizon says “The unexpectedly small velocities measured using helioseismology are the most noteworthy helioseismology result since the launch of HMI”. Adds Birch, “There is no clear way to reconcile the observations and theory”. Gizon then concludes “This result not only sheds a new light on the Sun – but also on our current inability to understand one of the most fundamental physical processes in the Sun and stars: convection”.
Leif do you have an explanation for the Solar Convection Zone Paradox? Have you though about it? I am the great expert on all things solar and you cannot find anything valid about the Sun that I’m not familiar with.The wording in the paper is very misleading for the uninitiated. What was found was that the Rossby number: the ratio of convective velocity to the speed of rotation is low and that convection is thus strongly influenced by the Coriolis force. This is a problem for some numerical models of the convection, which just shows that those need to be improved. This is not the same as to say that the ‘standard model’ must be rejected. The standard model is extremely successful.
I have asserted that the majority of the warming in the last 150 years is due to solar cycle changes. I have also asserted the solar cycle has been interrupted Assertions like that are not science, but wishful thinking.
AS IF it matters. CO2 is the driving force behind globull warming. The sun just provides a little light..
You mean the sun has an impact on our climate change? Someone should tell Al GOre. Funny how no one from the climate change fan club seems to think that the sun has any affect.
The records from 1749-1799 are today stored in the library of the Astrophysikalisches Institut Potsdam, Germany, and are in very good condition. Arlt (2008) has recently photographed the drawings. See e.g. http://www.leif.org/research/Recount-of-Staudach.pdf Later records are similarly photographed and have been published long ago.
It was determined last July that our sun is descending into the next Solar Gand Minimum a natural cycle that occurs approximately every 350-450yrs, it’s been 400yrs since the last one and we are due! Every Grand Minimum is preceded by a warming period, thus the global warming scare that had nothing to do with C02 emissions and It’s easy to prove. When our planet was warming, as stated more than once in the above comments it stopped over 18yrs ago. NASA, NOAA, GISS,IPCC among others have been fudging data to keep the grant money flowing period! The IPCC only used the word “SOLAR” once in its last report, that is why not ONE OF THEIR MODELS HAVE BEEN CORRECT! ZERO, ZIP, NONE! Anyway, when earth warmed the weather also changed on every planet in our solar system. The ice caps on Mars melted, the winds on Venus increased by a third ect. Look it up for yourselves. Our C02 wasn’t affecting other planets so don’t even go there. More than anything else, solar activity drives our weather, they just won’t talk about it because it doesn’t fit their narrative of using fear to steal billions for the taxpayers! There is also another natural cycle that is affecting our weather, the earth started a magnetic reversal 10-15yrs ago. The last time that happened was almost 800,000yrs ago and it’s definitely having an affect on our planet. The fact is folks, it’s going to get cold, antarctic ice levels have just broken al time records again and the arctic had expanding quickly, the ice never even completely melted out of Hudson Bay this summer, and it started refreeze a month early. Our sun is going to sleep for a bit and their is a 99% certainty of that, look it up! Those who lie will continue to, this is the honest to god’s truth so start to prepare for it now. In 10-15yrs we’ll be ass deep in it!
Solar “Grand Minima” Threat Analysis James A. Marusek 2009 We are approaching a period when the sun is going quiet. In the past, these periods with few sunspots, such as the Dalton Minimum, Maunder Minimum, & Spörer Minimum, produced decades of global cooling, famine and plagues. This paper provides an analysis of the global cooling threat. I. Solar Cycles Solar activity, visible by the number of sunspots, varies over a cycle of approximately 11 years. This variation is defined as a solar sunspot cycle. The periodic cycle begins at a solar minimum, peaks at a solar maximum and then falls back down to the next solar minimum. The International Sunspot Index is used to define the beginning and end of each solar cycle. Currently the Earth is in a solar minimum transitioning into Solar Cycle 24. The Sun undergoes a magnetic pole reversal approximately once every 11 years. The Sun’s magnetic field is normally dipolar but during solar maximum, quadrupole and octupole components exist as well. It has been suggested that the sunspot cycle is related to the planetary cycle of the four major planets: Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune.1 There are three centers of mass that are of interest, the sun, the major planets, and the solar system. Approximately once every eleven years, the four major planets are grouped ahead of the sun as the solar system moves through galactic space. This causes the sun to occupy a reciprocal position Figure 1. Image of Solar Cycle 23 from the Solar and Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO) by Steele Hill (NASA GSFC). Impact 2009 1 1 Nuclear Physicist and Engineer, U.S. Department of the Navy, retired on the opposite side of the solar system’s center of mass. About eleven years later the major planets are grouped behind the sun causing it to occupy a reciprocal position ahead of the solar system’s center of mass. The sun therefore alternately accelerates as it moves forward through galactic space and then decelerates to occupy a position behind the solar system’s center of mass. All this occurs while the solar system as a whole moves forward through galactic space. The acceleration and deceleration cause the sun to wobble in its path. The wobble creates turbulence in the sun’s interior, which is characterized by changes in sunspot activity. II. The Quiet Sun – “Grand Minima” The sun exhibits great variability in the strength of each solar cycle. This activity ranges from the extremely quiet “Grand Minima” such as the Maunder Minimum (1645-1715 A.D.) to a very active “Grand Maxima” such as the enhanced activity observed during most of the 20th century (1940-2000 A.D.). High energy galactic cosmic rays enter Earth’s atmosphere collide with sufficient force to cause a nuclear spallation reaction with atmospheric molecules. Some of the fission products include radionuclides 14C and 10Be, which settle down on Earth’s surface. Their concentration can be measured in ice cores, allowing a reconstruction of solar activity levels into the distant past. The sun’s magnetic field wrapped in the solar winds deflects galactic cosmic rays trying to enter the solar system and is therefore responsible for modulating production of these radioactive isotopes. Usoskin et al. details the reconstruction of solar activity during the Holocene period from 10,000 B.C. to the present.2 Refer to Figure 2. The reconstructions indicate that the overall level of solar activity since the middle of the 20th century stands amongst the highest of the past 10,000 years. This time period was a very strong “Grand Maxima”. Typically these grand maxima are short-lived lasting in the order of 50 years. The reconstruction also reveals “Grand Minima” epochs of suppressed activity, of varying durations have occurred repeatedly over that time span. A solar Grand Minima is defined as a period when the (smoothed) sunspot number is less than 15 during at least two consecutive decades. The sun spends about 17 percent of the time in a Grand Minima state. Figure 2. Sunspot activity throughout the Holocene. Blue and red areas denote grand minima and maxima, respectively. The entire series is spread out over two panels for better visibility.2 Impact 2009 2 A “Grand Minima’ state can last for several decades. Approximately 27 “Grand Minima” have occurred during the Holocene covering the past 12,000 years. The following table identifies the approximate dates and durations of these “Grand Minima”.2 Center of Grand Minima Duration 1680 A.D. 80 years 1470 A.D. 160 years 1305 A.D. 70 years 1040 A.D. 60 years 685 A.D. 70 years 360 B.C. 60 years 765 B.C. 90 years 1390 B.C. 40 years 2860 B.C. 60 years 3335 B.C. 70 years 3500 B.C. 40 years 3625 B.C. 50 years 3940 B.C. 60 years 4225 B.C. 30 years 4325 B.C. 50 years 5260 B.C. 140 years 5460 B.C. 60 years 5620 B.C. 40 years 5710 B.C. 20 years 5985 B.C. 30 years 6215 B.C. 30 years 6400 B.C. 80 years 7035 B.C. 50 years 7305 B.C. 30 years 7515 B.C. 150 years 8215 B.C. 110 years 9165 B.C. 150 years III. Galactic Cosmic Rays Galactic Cosmic Rays (GCRs) are high-energy charged particles that originate outside our solar system. About 85 percent are protons (nuclei of hydrogen atoms), 12 percent alpha particles (helium nuclei) and the remainder are electrons and the nuclei of heavier atoms. The energy levels of GCRs observed in deep space generally lie in the 100 MeV (million electron volts) to 10 GeV (billion electron volts) range. Above 1 GeV, the particle flux rate decreases significantly according to a power law with an exponent of approximately 2.5. Cosmic rays are produced when a star exhausts its nuclear fuel and explodes into a supernova. These stars are generally new short-lived blue stars of the spectral type O (20-100 solar masses) or blue-white stars of spectral type B (3-20 solar masses). Impact 2009 3 Figure 3. Pictorial of GCR interaction with the Sun’s Heliosphere. The Sun’s magnetic field modulates the GCR flux rate on Earth. Just as cosmic rays are deflected by the magnetic fields in interstellar space, they are also affected by the interplanetary magnetic field embedded in the solar wind (the plasma of ions and electrons blowing from the solar corona at about 400 km/sec), and therefore have difficulty reaching the inner solar system. The effects from the solar winds are felt at distance approximately 200 AU from the sun, in a region of space known as the Heliosphere. Refer to Figure 3. The relationship between solar cycles and GCR flux rate at the Earth’s surface is shown in Figure 4. Rz is the Sunspot Number. J is the cosmic ray flux. This flux rate measured energetic galactic cosmic rays in the energy range of 145-440 MeV using ground based neutron monitors. During solar maximum the GCR flux rate is at its minimum. During solar minimums, the GCR flux rate increases significantly. The graph covers the period from 1974-2001. Figure 4. Sunspot Cycle vs. GCR flux rate.3 Impact 2009 4 IV. Clouds The sun is a major influence on climate change on Earth in that it provides solar irradiance that warms the planet and a far reaching magnetic field that shields Earth from the effects of galactic cosmic rays, which cools the planet. The magnetic field wrapped in the solar winds modulates the flux rate of cosmic rays which affects cloud formation and thereby the planet’s global albedo. Past studies have shown a relationship between the flux rate of galactic cosmic rays and low-level ocean cloud formation. Research by Nigel Marsh, Henrik Svensmark and Eigil Friis-Christensen provides a good foundation in understanding the relationship between galactic cosmic rays and cloud formation.4,5,6 When GCRs collide with the Earth’s atmosphere, they release in nuclear collision a cascade of secondary particles (protons, neutrons and muons), which continue to penetrate deeper and deeper into the atmosphere. This cascading effect continues until the particle’s energy falls too low to undergo further collisions. This generally ends around 16 kilometers above the Earth’s surface in the lower atmosphere. The ions produced within the troposphere by cosmic rays are important element of aerosol production. In the troposphere, ionization contributes to gas-particle formation of ultra fine (<20nm) aerosols that build into cloud condensation nuclei (CCN). Charged raindrops are ten to a hundred times more efficient in capturing aerosols than uncharged drops. In slightly supersaturated water vapor, when aerosol is dissolved in the tiny haze particles the droplets’ vapor pressure lowers, which increases droplet growth. The water vapor condenses into larger water droplets that form clouds. Earth’s ocean cloud cover is strongly correlated with GCR flux modulated by solar cycle variations. Refer to Figure 5. Figure 5. A strong correlation between Galactic Cosmic Rays (GCRs) and Earth’s cloud cover. Figure shows cosmic rays fluxes from Climax (thick curve) plotted against four satellite cloud data sets over the ocean. Triangles are the Nimbus-7 data, squares are the ISCCP-C2 data, diamonds are the DMSP data, and crosses are the ISCCP-D2 data.6 Low clouds tend to be optically thick and are efficient at reflecting sunlight back into space. An increase in low altitude clouds will result in planetary cooling. GCRs are a very effective amplifying mechanism for climate forcing because the energy needed to change cloudiness is small compared with the resulting changes in solar radiation received at the Earth’s surface. Impact 2009 5 Interestingly, during the 20th Century, the Sun’s magnetic field which shields Earth from cosmic rays more than doubled, thereby reducing the average influx of cosmic rays. The resulting reduction in cloudiness, especially of low-altitude clouds, may be a significant factor in the global warming Earth has undergone during the last century. In 2006, the Danish National Space Center in Copenhagen conducted experimental studies of aerosol nucleation in air, containing trace amounts of ozone, sulfur dioxide and water vapor at concentrations representative of Earth’s atmosphere over the oceans. Their experiments confirmed the causal mechanism by which cosmic rays facilitate the production of clouds in Earth’s atmosphere.7 Specifically the experiments showed that (1) stable cloud aerosol clusters were formed in the presence of ions, (2) the nucleation rate was proportional to the ion density, (3) the characteristic time for producing stable clusters was very short (2 seconds or less). V. Global Temperature Historically observations show the strength of the Sun’s magnetic field is not constant. One gauge of this variation in solar magnetic field intensity is visible in sunspot activity. The Maunder Minimum (1645-1715 A.D.) provides insight into the influence of the Sun’s magnetic field on natural global climate change on Earth. Refer to Figure 6. During the 30-year period from 1672-1699 A.D., there were less than 50 sunspots detected, whereas during the past century over the same period between 40,000-50,000 sunspots appeared. During the Maunder Minimum, the solar wind was depressed, which allowed greater penetration of GCRs into the inner solar system. This period of minimal solar magnetic field resulted in a prolonged period of greater cloud cover producing a significant decline in Earth’s temperature. The Maunder Minimum which is referred to as the Little Ice Age is noted as one of the coldest periods during the past 2,000 years. Figure 6. From 1645-1715 A.D, the sun’s magnetic field went quiet. This was known as the Maunder Minimum. This plot shows the variation in the number of observed sunspots during the time period 1600-1800 A.D. The red curve is the Wolf sunspot number, and the purple line a count of sunspot groups based on a reconstruction by D.V. Hoyt. The green crosses are aurora counts, based on a reconstruction by K. Krivsky and J.P. Legrand. Impact 2009 6 The oceans are the key to unlocking the mysteries of climate change. About 70 percent of the Earth’s surface is covered in water, which absorbs sunlight and warms. The oceans act as a large planetary heat sink because they retain heat better than land masses. Considering the available data, it is clear that the oceans warmed over the 20th Century by about the same amount as the atmosphere. This agreement should not be entirely surprising as 70 percent of the mean global air temperature comes from over oceans. The inconvenient truth that is generally ignored, is that the atmosphere is not capable of warming the oceans to any significant degree – 99.9 percent of ocean heat is derived from sunlight at wavelengths less than 3 microns. The balance is mostly from heat leaking from the interior of the Earth. The Greenhouse Effect involves a delay in the loss of infra-red radiation at wavelengths greater than 5 microns.8 Variations in the amount of sunlight reaching the oceans control the rate at which the oceans warm. This is influenced at long time scales by changes in the Earth’s orbit. At short time scales there are changes in the amount of solar irradiance associated with the sunspot cycle. These changes are small. However, the main driver in climate change is the amount of cloud and ice cover. Clouds and sea ice reflect sunlight before it can be absorbed by the oceans, and is referred to as albedo. Albedo changes have a greater influence on climate than the Greenhouse Effect. Oceans lose heat through evaporation (53 percent), infra-red radiation (41 percent) and conduction (6 percent). The Greenhouse Effect can slow the loss of the infra-red radiation, thereby warming the atmosphere but not the oceans. However, evaporation accounts for more than half the heat loss. Evaporation produces clouds, and hence there is a feedback loop – warming the oceans results in more evaporation, producing more clouds, which increases albedo, which cools the oceans. This is exactly what was observed during The Tropical Ocean Global Atmosphere Coupled Ocean Atmosphere Response Experiment (TOGA COARE) that was set up to investigate the Pacific Warm Pool – the warmest ocean water in the western equatorial Pacific Ocean. COARE also found that rainfall would cool the ocean surface, so increased evaporation producing rain is another feedback loop.8 What does this have to do with the 20th Century? Well the observed climate change is consistent with variations in albedo and associated ocean warming and cooling, suggesting that it is just a natural cycle. This pattern of behavior is evident in paleoclimate data for most of the last 10,000 years. None of this is simulated in climate models.. Is the link between the intensity of the sun’s magnetic field and surface ocean temperature quantifiable? Because the area represented by the oceans is large; a long-term change in low level clouds over the ocean should have a significant effect on planetary temperature. Most of the natural background radiation over the oceans is derived from cosmic radiation rather than natural sources. As a result, the effect of GCR cloud modulation is greatest over the oceans where there is less dust to form clouds and there is a shortage of cloud forming ions. Rain removes the ions, so they must be constantly replenished. One method of measuring the sun’s magnetic strength is by measuring the production of sunspots. But Georgieva recommends a better method by measuring the ability of the magnetic field wrapped in the solar winds to interact and distort the Earth’s magnetic field. The high speed solar wind stream is produced by Coronal Mass Ejections, Coronal Holes and Magnetic Clouds. The geomagnetic activity reflects the impact of solar activity originating from both closed and open magnetic field regions on the sun, so it is a better indicator of solar magnetic activity than sunspot number which is related to only closed magnetic field regions.9 This geomagnetic distortion has been measured at two locations on the opposite side of the globe, one in Great Britain and the other in Australia, since 1868 A.D. This combined distortion is referred to as the "AA index". Figure 7 graphs global monthly ocean temperature anomalies in relationship to the “AA index” for the past 120 years. The relationship is described by the formula: Ocean Surface Temperature Anomaly = 0.203 ln (AA Index) – 0.778°C (1) Impact 2009 7 Impact 2009 8 This figure was derived using the Smith-Reynolds Extended Reconstructed Sea Surface Temperature (ERSST.v3)10. The time series in ASCII format was accessed throughftp://eclipse.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/ersst/ pdo/ by selecting dataset aravg.mon.ocean.90S.90N.asc]. The monthly dataset aravg.mon.ocean.90S. 90N.asc was used which covers Sea Surface Temperature (SST) for the period from January 1880 to October 2007 for the entire ocean from 90° North latitude to 90° South latitude. The temperature anomalies are computed from the analyzed monthly field minus the climatology for that month using the years 1971-2000 as a baseline. The second parameter used was the monthly “AA Index” which covers the period from January 1868 to September 2007.11 [The time series is accessed by selecting the dataset AA_Month.] Since major volcanic eruptions are known to affect Earth’s climate, the database provided by the Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History on Large Holocene Eruptions was used to filter out this climatic effect. 12 All eruptions with a Volcanic Explosivity Index (VEI) of 6 or greater were identified and the temperature data from the time of eruption until two years later were deleted from the dataset. These eruptions include Krakatau (27 Aug. 1883), Santa Maria (24 Oct. 1902), Novarupta (6 Jun. 1912) and Pinatubo (15 Jun. 1991). One might question if the natural log drop-off as the “AA Index” approaches zero is a real phenomena. Figure 8 shows an ocean surface temperature reconstruction in the Sargasso Sea, a 2 million square mile region of the Atlantic Ocean as determined by isotope ratios of marine organism remains in sediment at the bottom of the sea. During the depths of the Little Ice Age, ocean temperatures were approximately 1°C colder than present. Although the Maunder Minimum preceded the start of “AA Index” measurements; it is my opinion that the Maunder Minimum represents a timeframe when this parameter approached zero. When an “AA Index” of near-zero (0.1) is entered into equation (1); it produces a temperature drop of approximately 1°C as compared to present day temperatures. Thus there appears to be agreement between the formula and observed sea temperatures on the extremes of the quiet sun. Figure 8. Surface temperatures in the Sargasso Sea, a 2 million square mile region of the Atlantic Ocean, with time resolution of 50 to 100 years. The horizontal line is the average temperature for this 3,000-year period. The Little Ice Age and Medieval Climate Optimum were naturally occurring, extended intervals of climate departures from the mean.13 This leads to the observation that the Earth’s climate system is fairly robust. Medium to high levels of solar magnetic fields produce fairly stable warm temperatures. Only when the sun is magnetically quiet does temperature take a dramatic plunge. Impact 2009 9 VI. Global Cooling Threat In the Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) theory according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC); the sun and Earth’s cloud cover play only minor roles in climate change. In the AGW theory, rising atmospheric carbon dioxide levels cause rising temperatures on Earth. But actual temperatures have been falling. From the peak year 1998, the lower Troposphere temperatures globally has fallen around 1/2 degrees Celsius. (1998 vs. 2008) This is despite the fact that during that same time period, atmospheric carbon dioxide has risen 5 percent from 367 ppm to 386 ppm. The AGW theory failed to predict this trend. Some might argue that weather is being confused with climate. The range of this data is over ten years. I assert that a decade of global temperatures represents a climate change and 1/2 degrees Celsius is too significant to be ignored. The AGW theory is hinged on untested (unvalidated) computer models. These falling temperatures occurred at the same time as the sun went quiet as it is transitioning into Solar Cycle 24. This observation conforms to the Natural Global Cooling (NGC) theory. The NGC theory has a long history of defining past climate changes, a history of observed cooling events such as the Dalton Minimum, Maunder Minimum, Spörer Minimum and Wolf Minimum. Any warming theorized by AGW appears to be insignificant in comparison to the large rapid fall observed in lower Tropospheric temperature being driven naturally by the weakening solar magnetic field during this solar minimum. Climate change is primarily driven by nature. It has been true in the days of my father and his father and all those that came before us. Because of science, not junk science, we have slowly uncovered some of the fundamental mysteries of nature. Our Milky Way galaxy is awash with cosmic rays. These are high speed charged particles that originate from exploding stars. Because they are charged, their travel is strongly influenced by magnetic fields. Our sun produces a magnetic field that extends to the edges of our solar system. This magnetic field is wrapped in the solar winds. This field deflects many of the cosmic rays away from Earth. But when the sun goes quiet (minimal sunspots), this field collapses inward allowing cosmic rays to penetrate deeper into our solar system. As a result, far greater numbers collide with Earth and penetrate down into the lower atmosphere where they ionize small particles of moisture (humidity) forming them into water droplets that become clouds. Low level clouds reflect sunlight back into space. An increase in Earth's cloud cover produce a global drop in temperature. These periods of quiet sun are referred to as a Grand Minima. The Maunder Minimum (1645-1715) and the Dalton Minimum (1790-1830) are examples. During a Grand Minima the Earth begins to slowly cool. The start of the planting season is delayed and in the fall early frost limits the harvest. Earthʼs abundant bounty is put on hold and starvation takes its ghastly grip. Historian, John D. Post, referred to the last period of quiet sun, the Dalton Minimum, as the “last great subsistence crisis in the Western world”. With the cold came massive crop failures, food riots, famine and disease. Several scientists including David Hathaway (NASA)14, William Livingston & Matthew Penn (National Solar Observatory)15, Khabibullo Abdusamatov (Russian Academy of Science)16, Cornelis de Jager (The Netherlands) & S. Duhau (Argentina)17 and Theodor Landscheidt (Germany)18, have forecasted that the sun may enter a period similar to the Dalton Minimum or a more severe “Grand Minima” a decade from now in Solar Cycle 25. A few scientists including David C. Archibald (Australia)19 and M. A. Clilverd (Britain)20 have warned this might even begin in Solar Cycle 24. We are at the transition into Solar Cycle 24 and this cycle has already shown itself to be unusually quiet. The number of spotless days (days without sunspots) during this solar minimum appears to be tracking 3 times the typical number observed during the last century (Solar Cycles 16-23). Impact 2009 10 There are several lessons learned from studying very early global cooling events in Europe. Lessons learned include: * Onset of these conditions can be very abrupt and very severe. * A decline in food production due to: – Dramatic increase in days with overcast skies. – Decline in the intensity of sunlight. – Decline by several degrees in global temperature – Regions of massive rainfall and flooding – Limited regions experienced droughts – Shortened growing season * A string of major and minor famines * Malnutrition lead to weakened immune system. Produced influenza epidemics. * Reoccurrence of plagues such as the Black Plague. * Lack of feed for livestock * Parasites (i.e. fusarium nivale), which thrived under snow cover, devastated crops. * Grain storage in cool damp conditions produced fungus (Ergot Blight). Contaminated grains when consumed caused an illness (St. Anthony’s Fire) producing convulsions, hallucinations, gangrenous rotting of extremities. * Flooding created swamplands that became mosquito breeding grounds and introduced tropical diseases such as malaria throughout Europe. * During hot summers, cold air aloft produced killer hailstorms (hailstones that could kill a cow). * Higher frequency of powerful storms produced major devastations. * Glacier advance swallowed up entire alpine villages. * Ruptured glacial ice dams produced deadly floods. Temperatures are already falling. The main threat from a “Dalton Minimum” or “Maunder Minimum” event is famine and starvation (affecting millions or hundreds of millions worldwide) due to shortened growing seasons and harsher weather. In the past, in addition to great famines, this cold harsh weather has also lead to major epidemics. Historical Pattern of Cold Weather Associated with a Quiet Sun Historical evidence exists of the Mississippi River, Ohio River, Allegheny River, Delaware River and Hudson River at the New York Harbor freezing and of very harsh winters. A few decades after the Dalton Minimum In the spring Eliza, a slave, carrying her young son, fled from Kentucky by crossing the Ohio River on foot. The river was “swollen and turbulent, great cakes of floating ice were swinging heavily to and fro in the turbid waters.” She leaped from one chunk of ice to the next until she reached freedom on the Ohio shore.21 [Harriet Beecher Stowe lived in Cincinnati, Ohio from 1832 to 1850. In 1851, she wrote “Uncle Tom’s Cabin”. Her life in Ohio was intertwined in this work of fiction.] During the Dalton Minimum The Hudson River at the New York Harbor froze, enabling people to walk across the ice from Manhattan to Staten Island. The Hudson froze over completely during particularly brutal winter of 1779/1780, when the surface was solid for five weeks straight and the British rolled cannons over the ice. In 1821, taverns were constructed in the middle of the river to offer warmth and refreshment to pedestrians.22,23 During the Dalton Minimum From 1803 to 1806, Captains Lewis and Clark lead a transcontinental expedition to explore the greater Northwest. During the winter of 1804/1805, the explorers set up a winter base camp near the Big Knife River near what is today the town of Bismarck, North Dakota. The winter was bitterly cold. There were 6 days with temperatures of -31°F or lower. These occurred in 1804 on December 12 (-38°F), December 17 (-45°F), December 18 (-32°F), in 1805 on January 10 (-40°F), January 11 (-38°F), and January 13 (-34°F). Compare this to the current low temperatures of Bismarck, North Dakota in which only one Impact 2009 11 day in the past decade fell below -30°F. On January 15, 2009 the temperature fell to -44°F.24,25 During the Dalton Minimum Early settlers routinely waited till winter to cross the frozen Mississippi river in their wagon trains. In 1799, George Frederick Bollinger led a group of early pioneers from North Carolina to establish early settlements in Missouri. They hoped to cross their largest obstacle, the Mississippi River, on the ice, frozen solid in mid-winter. They arrived on the east bank of the Mississippi river opposite St. Genevieve in late December, pitched camp and explored potential river crossings. St. Genevieve is located about a hundred miles downstream from St. Louis. Daily the thickness of the ice was measured and then on December 31, a chopped hole in the ice indicated thickness well over two feet. The next day the settlers successfully drove their heavy loaded wagons across the river.26 Between the Dalton Minimum and the Maunder Minimum December 1776 was a desperate time for George Washington and the American Revolution. During the night of December 25, Washington led his small Continental army of 2,400 troops from Pennsylvania across the Delaware River made dangerous and barely navigable by huge chunks of ice. Once across they launched a surprise attack on the Britain's Hessian mercenaries at Trenton, New Jersey, capturing 1,000 prisoners and seizing muskets, powder, and artillery.27,28 Between the Dalton Minimum and the Maunder Minimum In Boston, Massachusetts on February 22, 1772, Anna, a young school girl, writes in her diary “Since about the middle of December, we have had till this week, a series of cold and stormy weather – every snow storm (of which we have had abundance) except the first, ended with rain, by which means the snow was so hardened that the strong gales at northwest soon turned it, and all above ground to ice.” In some streets about town this mixture of ice and snow is 5 feet thick. On March 11, she writes that the snow is now 7 feet deep in some places around her house.29 Between the Dalton Minimum and the Maunder Minimum Just before the opening battles of the French and Indian War in December 1753, George Washington, then 21 years old, crossed the Allegheny River. In their first attempt, Washington and a guide used a raft to cross the ice-choked river and this ended in disaster as Washington was knocked overboard in deep water and saved himself only by catching the raft as it swept by. The severe cold that night froze their clothes and the guide's fingers. The river also froze, however, allowing them to walk across on the ice the next morning. Soon they reached the safety of an English trader's settlement.30 During the Maunder Minimum During the Great Frost of (1683–1684) in England, the River Thames was completely frozen for two months, the ice was 11 inches thick at London. Sea ice was reported along the coasts of southeast England, and ice prevented the use of many harbors. The sea froze, so that ice formed for a time between Dover and Calais, joining England and France. (It is more likely that the shorelines froze and a great mass of densely packed icebergs, some 11 feet thick, built up along the coastlines fusing into a semi-rigid structure that may have connected the two shorelines together.) The Thames was recorded to have frozen over at London during the years: 1649, 1655, 1663, 1666, 1667, 1684, 1695, 1709, and 1716.31,32,33,34 During the Little Ice Age, growing seasons in England and Continental Europe generally became short and unreliable, which led to shortages and famine. These hardships were nothing compared to the more northerly countries: Glaciers advanced rapidly in Greenland, Iceland, Scandinavia and North America, making vast tracts of land uninhabitable. The Arctic pack ice extended so far south that several reports describe Eskimos landing their kayaks in Scotland. Finland’s population fell by one-third, Iceland’s by half, the Viking colonies in Greenland were abandoned altogether, as were many Inuit communities.35 Impact 2009 12 During the Spörer Minimum By 1518, early explorers made significant progress in probing and surveying the New World. They described North America as a “land of frozen seas, horrid, barren and scarcely habitable for cold”. “In the New World, cold predominates. The rigor of the frigid zone extends over half of those regions which should be temperate by their position. Countries where the grape and the fig should ripen, are buried under snow one half of the year; and lands situated in the same parallel with the most fertile and best cultivated provinces in Europe, are chilled with perpetual frosts, which almost destroy the power of vegetation.”36 VII. Plague Causal Relationship Great famines and plagues appeared together historically, not only because malnourished populations are more susceptible to disease but because they share a common causal link. I assert that the plagues did not just coincide with past global cooling events but were directly spawned by the increasing levels of GCR radiation. Two examples, which appeared at the onset of both the Dark Ages and the beginning of the Little Ice Age, are the Yersinia Pestis bacillus, and the Rinderpest virus. Radiation is a powerful mutagen. The long-term effects of radiation are genetic alteration, cancer induction, damage to the central nervous system and peripheral neurons and accelerated aging. Densely ionizing radiation like alpha particles or heavier ions generate a greater biological effect than the same dose of X-rays. X-rays can produce isolated single and double DNA strand breaks, which can be repaired by the cells rather quickly and cleanly. Proton and ion radiation produces complex cluster damage to the DNA strands that are significantly less repairable. A macroscopic tumor may originate from only one transformed cell. If a single mutated cell survives, cancer may develop. The primary means that multicellular organisms utilize to repair radiation damage is to identify and discard the affected cell and manufacture replacements. But single cell organisms do not have that luxury. As a result, many single cell organisms have evolved very complex and redundant repair mechanisms that ensure their survivability even under higher levels of radiation damage. The most resistant organisms are singlestranded viruses, followed by double-stranded viruses, bacteria, algae and yeast. Under nuclear radiation, many of these single cell organisms will mutate and survive. The genetic variations will spawn new mutated single cell organisms that are extremely virulent and deadly especially to the future host they infect. That is why great plagues are intertwined with the great famines at the onset of major global cooling events. Sensitivity of Prokaryotic and Eukaryotic Organisms to Radiation Name Species D0 (Grays) T1-phange Virus 2600 Escherichia. coli B/r Bacteria 30 Bacillus subtilis cells Bacillus 33 Saccharomyces cerevisiae Yeast 150 Chlamydomonas Algae 24 Human Human 1.4 D0 is defined as the dose necessary to reduce survival to 1/e (37%). Gray is a unit of measure defined as 1 joule per kilogram of absorbed radiation.37 This table shows that typically viruses, bacteria and bacilli can survive the damage from greater ionizing radiation exposure than many multicellular organisms. But very high energy GCRs will damage these organisms producing new mutated and lethal strains. Water is a natural shield to nuclear radiation. These genetic mutations are most likely to occur where the Earth’s natural atmospheric shielding is thinest, and the air is the driest, such as the high deserts. Impact 2009 13 Rinderpest An extremely virulent variant of Rinderpest struck animals immediately at the onset of the first Little Ice Age in 1315 A.D. producing an animal plague that wiped out vast herd of oxen, sheep, goats, camels, buffaloes, yaks, etc. In several large herds, only a couple animals survived. This plague was also present during the Dark Ages that began in 536 A.D. Black Death (Bubonic Plague) Yersinia Pestis is a pathogen that has undergone large-scale genetic flux. Global cooling at the beginning of the Dark Ages began in 536 A.D. An outbreak of the Bubonic Plague struck Constantinople 6 years later. It was caused by a very deadly variant of the Yersinia Pestis bacillus that used fleas (and rats) as a plague transport mechanism. This plague was referred to as the Plague of Justine. As it swept from the Middle East to the Mediterranean Basin, approximately 50 percent of population perished. Global cooling at the beginning of the Little Ice Age began in 1315 A.D. An outbreak of the Bubonic Plague struck the Chinese Gobi Desert 15 years later. This deadly variant of the Yersinia Pestis bacillus killed 35 million Asians and spread westward where it killed approximately 1/3 of the European population. The plague was known as the Black Death. It came in three variants: bubonic plague, primary septicemic plague, and the pneumonic plague. To date, this deadly bacillus has been responsible for 200 million human deaths. The flea/rat/human plague route still exists today. The Earth is a fertile ground for another great plague. If a mutated form of the bubonic plague were to infect the rat population, the results could be devastating. For example, it is estimated that the number of rats living in New York City is in the range of 44-96 million. The estimated rat population in the United States may exceed 300 million. Malaria Another type of plague occurred during past global cooling events. But this time, instead of resulting from genetic mutation, it was due to the GCR induced extensive flooding. The heavy rainfalls produced new swamplands across the globe. These swamps became breeding grounds for major mosquito borne diseases including malaria. Major malaria outbreaks occurred across Europe during the beginning of the Little Ice Age around 1315 A.D. Malaria is transmitted by mosquitoes. When a mosquito bites an infected person, it ingests microscopic malaria parasites found in the person’s blood. When the mosquito then bites another person, the parasites go from the mosquito’s mouth into the person’s blood. Within a human, the parasite goes to the liver, replicates, and moves into the bloodstream, where it attacks red blood cells for their hemoglobin. Toxins from the parasite are then released into the blood, making the person feel sick. Malaria produces fever and flu-like illness, including shaking chills, headache, muscle aches, and tiredness. Nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea can also occur. Malaria in children can produce anemia, jaundice, kidney failure, seizures, mental confusion, coma, and death. The World Health Organization estimates that 300-500 million cases of malaria occur and more than 1 million people die each year from malaria, mostly children in sub-Sahara Africa. Impact 2009 14 VIII. Earth’s Magnetic Field Weakening of the Earth’s magnetic field, fracturing the strong dipole into several mini-pole reversals, is a strong amplifying mechanism for GCR induced global cooling. We live in a Great Ice Age called the Pleistocene Epoch which began around 1.8 million years ago and will continue for several million years into the future. During an Ice Age, the Earth cycles between cold Glacial and warm Interglacial periods. An Interglacial is a short warming period where the Earth thaws between the icy grips of the glacial periods. The present interglacial period (the Holocene) began approximately 12,000 years ago. ICE AGE TRANSITIONS FOR PAST 1.5 MILLION YEARS Holocene (interglacial, 12,000 years ago – present) Wisconsin/Weichsel (glacial period, 110,000 – 12,000 years ago) Sangamonian/Eemian (interglacial, 130,000 – 110,000 years ago) Illinoian/Saale (glacial, 200,000 – 130,000 years ago) Yarmouth/Holstein (interglacial, 300,000/380,000 – 200,000 years ago) Kansan/Elsterian (glacial, 455,000 – 300,000/380,000 years ago) Aftonian (interglacial, 620,000 – 455,000 years ago) Nebraskan/Menapian (glacial, 680,000 – 620,000 years ago) Pastonian Stage (interglacial, 800,000 – 680,000 years ago) Pre-Pastonian Stage (glacial, 1,300,000 – 800,000 years ago) Bramertonian Stage (interglacial, 1,550,000 – 1,300,000 years ago) One of the predominant theories describing the cause of glacial/interglacial periods is the Milankovitch cycle theory. According to the theory, small variations in Earth-Sun geometry change determine the amount of sunlight each hemisphere receives during the Earth’s yearly orbital cycle around the Sun. These geometry changes include (1) eccentricity – small variations in the changing of Earth’s orbit around the sun (circular/ oval) on a 100,000 year cycle, (2) obliquity – the tilt of Earth’s spin axis between 22 and 24 degrees every 41,000 years, and (3) precession – Earth wobbles toward and away from the Sun over the span of 19,000 to 23,000 years. But the theory fails in describing (1) the abrupt nature of transition boundaries between glacial and interglacial periods (sometimes occurring within a few short years, (2) because orbitally-induced changes in the solar energy flux received by the Earth is too weak, and (3) because the actual glacial/interglacial period lengths vary significantly from theoretical projections. When the Earth’s magnetic field is strong, it is characterized as a dipole with a north and south magnetic pole on opposite sides of the Earth. But when the magnetic field weakens, it often breaks down into quadrupoles, octupoles and local magnetic field reversals (mini-pole reversals). The appearance of this complex structure allows mini-poles to effectively cancel out the Earth’s total magnetic field reducing the overall magnetic field strength to 10 percent or below. During this phase the local fields can reverse polarity several times before they restructure back into a strong dipole configuration. The restructuring can lead to a global polarity reversal or to a restoration of the normal state. The intensity of the earth’s magnetic field has been declining. Scientific analysis of ancient pottery has shown that the magnetic field strength has declined 50 percent in the last 4,000 years. Recently, the decline has become very steep and pronounced. The decline in field strength at the equator has fallen 4.5 percent during the last century. Most of this decline occurred during the last 25 years. Using the International Geomagnetic Reference Field (IGRF) data set, the magnetic field at the equator in Open Ocean shows a decline of 1.7 percent in intensity since 1980. (Geomag program, IGRF dataset, latitude 0 degrees, longitude 180 degrees, years 1980-2005, a decline from 34,824 to 34,246 nanoTesla (nT)). Impact 2009 15 Dr. Heikki Nevanlinna, Research Professor at Geophysics Research, Finnish Meteorological Institute, wrote an article in Helsingin Sanomat, the leading newspaper in Finland, July 27, 2002. In the article, he states that the North Hemisphere magnetic pole has moved 1500 kilometers in the past 100 years while the South Hemisphere magnetic pole has moved only 1000 kilometers during the same period. The structure of the Earth's magnetic field is currently asymmetric. A South Atlantic Anomaly (SAA) has appeared, which is a major depression in the magnetic field strength. The field strength within this depression approaches only 20,000 nanoTesla (nT).38 The SAA can be described as a large local magnetic field reversal. The fact that Earth’s magnetic field is currently asymmetric combined with the fact that a magnetic field depression has formed would lead one to believe that the Earth’s magnetic pole components are being restructured. When Earth’s magnetic field changes are viewed through the prism of GCR/cloud linkage, an interesting observation can be made. Cloud formation due to cosmic rays is temperature dependent and therefore latitude dependent. The earth is protected by a magnetic field that provides the greatest protection at the equator and the weakest at the poles. But the poles are generally the coldest areas on the earth, characterized by very low humidity. Without any moisture and heat to work with, cosmic rays are very ineffectual in forming clouds. But on the other hand the equatorial ocean areas with heat and humidity are great breeding grounds for massive storms, but these are the areas shielded the most by earth's magnetic field. GCR penetration in the equatorial region is a robust mechanism for great cloud formation. Therefore as the Earth’s magnetic field begins to weaken and localized areas of magnetic pole reversals form closer to equatorial regions, the effects of GCR cooling greatly increases. The Earth’s magnetic field was extremely robust during the Holocene. The abrupt strengthening in the magnetic field coincided with the abrupt end of the last glacial period. By contrast, the last two interglacial periods came to an end when the Earth’s magnetic field was weak and near the point of a magnetic field reversal. I assert that the weakening of the Earth’s magnetic field will signal the end of the present Holocene interglacial. As the Earth’s magnetic field weakens further, other regions of magnetic field reversals will materialize. When these regions materialize near equatorial regions where elevated moisture and heat prevail, significant global cooling will begin driving the Earth back into the next Glacial period. Solar “Grand Minima” occur very abruptly. I assert that these minima will occur during both glacial and interglacial periods. The combination of a mini-pole reversal near the equatorial region with a “Grand Minima” event can explain the abruptness seen in interglacial/glacial transitions. References: 1. W.J.R. Alexander, F. Bailey, D.B. Bredenkamp, A van der Merwe and N. Willemse (2007) Linkages between solar activity, climate predictability and water resource development,, Journal of the South African Institute of Civil Engineering, 49 (2), June 2007, pp. 32-44. URL: http://nzclimatescience.net/images/PDFs/alexander2707.pdf [cited 14 April 2009] 2. I.G. Usoskin, S.K. Solanki, and G.A. Kovaltsov (2007) Grand minima and maxima of solar activity: new observational constraints, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 471, pp. 301-309, doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20077704, URL: http://cc.oulu.fi/~usoskin/ personal/aa7704-07.pdf [cited 14 April 2009] 3. S.A. Starodubtsev, I.G. Usoskin, A.V. Grigoryev and K. Mursula, (2005) Long-Term Modulation of the Cosmic Ray Fluctuation Spectrum: Spacecraft Measurements, 29th International Cosmic Ray Conference Pune, 2, pp. 247-250. URL: http:// cc.oulu.fi/~usoskin/personal/ICRC2005_yaku.pdf [cited 27 May 2009] 4. Marsh, N. and H. Svensmark (2000) Cosmic Rays, Clouds and Climate, Space Science Review 94, pp. 215-230, URL: http:// http://www.dsri.dk/~hsv/SSR_Paper.pdf [cited 14 April 2009] 5. H. Svensmark (1998) Influence of Cosmic Rays on Earth’s Climate, Physical Review Letters, 81, 15 October 1998, pp. 5027– 5030, URL: http://www.dsri.dk/~hsv/prlresup2.pdf [cited 14 April 2009] 6. H. Svensmark, and E. Friis-Christensen (1997) Variation of cosmic ray flux and global cloud coverage – a missing link in solar-climate relationships, Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics, 59 (11), pp. 1225-1232, URL: http:// http://www.dsri.dk/~hsv/9700001.pdf [cited 14 April 2009] Impact 2009 16 7. H. Svensmark, J.O.P. Pedersen, N.D. Marsh, M.B. Enghoff and U.I. Uggerhoj (2007), Experimental evidence for the role of ions in particle nucleation under atmospheric conditions, Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 463 (2078) pp. 385-396, doi:10.1098/rspa.2006.1773. 8. Willem de Lange, Why I am a Climate Realist, New Zealand Centre for Political Research, 23 May 2009, URL: http:// http://www.nzcpr.com/guest147.htm [cited 27 May 2009] 9. K. Georgieva, C. Bianchi and B. Kirov (2005) Once again about global warming and solar activity, Mem. S.A.It., 76 (969), URL: http://sait.oat.ts.astro.it/MSAIt760405/PDF/2005MmSAI..76..969G.pdf [cited 3 January 2008 10. National Climate Data Center, NOAA, Extended Reconstructed Sea Surface Temperature (ERSST.v3), URL: http:// http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/sst/ersstv3.php#desc [cited 8 January 2008] 11. National Climate Data Center, NOAA, Solar Data, URL:ftp://ftp.ngdc.noaa.gov/STP/SOLAR_DATA/RELATED_INDICES/ AA_INDEX/ [cited 17 December 2007]. 12. Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History, Large Holocene Eruptions, URL:http://www.volcano.si.edu/world/ largeeruptions.cfm [cited 17 December 2007] 13. A.B. Robinson, N.E. Robinson, and W. Soon [2007] Environmental effects of increased atmospheric carbon dioxide, Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons 12, pp. 79-90, URL:http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p36.htm [cited 10 January 2008] 14. Solar Cycle 25 peaking around 2022 could be one of the weakest in centuries, Physorg.com, URL: http://www.physorg.com/ pdf66581392.pdf [cited 25 May 2009] 15. W. Livingston and M. Penn, Sunspots may vanish by 2015, URL:http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/ livingston-penn_sunspots2.pdf [cited 25 May 2009] 16. Kh. I. Abdusamatov, (2007) Optimal prediction of the peak of the next 11-year activity cycle and of the peaks of several succeeding cycles on the basis of long-term variations in the solar radius or solar constant, Kinematics and Physics of Celestial Bodies, 23 (3), June 2007, pp. 97-100, URL:http://www.springerlink.com/content/6t76758j320636u7/ [cited 25 May 2009] 17. C. de Jager and S. Duhau, (2009) Forecasting the parameters of sunspot cycle 24 and beyond, Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics, 71 (2), February 2009, pp. 239-245, URL:http://www.sciencedirect.com/science? _ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6VHB-4V4KR23-5&_user=777686&_coverDate=02%2F28%2F2009&_alid=908671499&_rdoc=6&_ fmt=high&_orig=search&_cdi=6062&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_ct=152&_acct=C000043031&_version=1&_urlVersion =0&_userid=777686&md5=b98b6ba80274218550738d993d1e7731 [cited 25 May 2009] 18. T. Landscheidt, New Little Ice Age, Instead of Global Warming?, URL:http://www.schulphysik.de/klima/landscheidt/ iceage.htm [cited 25 May 2009] 19. D. Archibald, (2006) Solar Cycles 24 and 25 and Predicted Climate Response, Energy & Environment, 17 (1), 2006, URL: http://www.davidarchibald.info/papers/Solar%20Cycles%2024%20and%2025%20and%20Predicted%20Climate %20Response.pdf [cited 25 May 2009] 20. M.A. Clilverd, E. Clarke, T. Ulich, H. Rishbeth, M.J. Jarvis, (2006) Predicting Solar Cycle 24 and beyond, Space Weather, 4, S09005, doi:10.1029/2005SW000207, URL:http://users.telenet.be/j.janssens/SC24Clilverd.pdf [cited 25 May 2009] 21. Harriet Beecher Stowe, Uncle Tom’s Cabin or, Life among the Lowly, The Easton Press, Norwalk, Connecticut, 1979 edition pp 32-41. 22. When New York Harbor Froze Over, 1779-1780, The Old Salt Bloghttp://www.oldsaltblog.com/tag/hudson-frozen/ [cited 14 April 2009] 23. D.B. Schneider, F.Y.I., The New York Times, 20 February 2000http://www.nytimes.com/2000/02/20/nyregion/fyi-859087.html? sec=&spon= [cited 14 April 2009] 24. The Journals of the Expedition under the Command of Captains Lewis and Clark, Volume 1, The Easton Press, Norwalk, Connecticut, 1993 edition, pp 85-98 25. Weather Underground, History of Bismarck, North Dakota,http://www.wunderground.com/history/airport/KBIS/2009/1/1/ MonthlyHistory.html?req_city=NA&req_state=NA&req_statename=NA [cited 14 April 2009] 26. The Bollinger Migration to the Louisiana Territory, part of "Bollinger Collection" compiled by Orena Bollinger in 1984 http:// freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~edfrye/bollou.html [cited 14 April 2009] 27. George Washington crossing the Delaware River by Leutze, Africans in America Resource Bank, http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/ part2/2h48.html, [cited 14 April 2009] 28. Washington's crossing of the Delaware River, Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Washington's_crossing_of_the_Delaware_River , [cited 14 April 2009] 29. Anna Green Winslow (1771-1773) Diary of a Boston School Girl, edited by Alice Morse Earle, The Riverside Press, Cambridge, 1894, pp 32-33, 42-43. 30. Mission to the Ohio, George Washington’s Mount Vernon Estate & Gardenshttp://www.mountvernon.org/visit/plan/index.cfm/ pid/129/ [cited 14 April 2009] 31. River Thames frost fairs, Wikipedia,http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/River_Thames_frost_fairs [cited 14 April 2009] 32. Historical Weather Events 1650-1699,http://www.booty.org.uk/booty.weather/climate/1650_1699.htm [cited 14 April 2009] 33. The Great Frost of 1683-4, http://www.pastpresented.info/frost1683.htm [cited 14 April 2009] 34. Where Thames Smooth Waters Glide, http://thames.me.uk/s00051.htm [cited 14 April 2009] 35. L. Solomon, The Deniers: Our Spotless Sun, Financial Post, 31 May 2008http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fpcomment/ archive/2008/05/31/the-deniers-our-spotless-sun.aspx [cited 14 April 2009] 36. William Robertson, The History of the Discovery and Settlement of America, 1826, Jones & Company, London, pp 80-81. 37. C. Baumstark-Khan and R. Facius (2002) Life under conditions of ionizing radiation. Astrobiology. The Quest for the Conditions of Life. Horneck, G., Baumstark-Khan, C. (Eds.), Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp. 261-284. 38. Danish Space Research Institute, Planetary Magnetic Fields, URL:http://www.dsri.dk/showpage.php3?id=65 [cited 14 April 2009]
(sorry your late brother isn’t around any longer, even if he may not had liked the above)
Correlation isn’t perfect , but no one expects it to be, it is the best that we have. When you, or someone else comes up with something better, that has the power to do it, I’ll pay attention.
You say solar didn’t and couldn’t do. I don’t thing much of your “complicated non-linear system natural internal stochastic variation”, kind of incoherent moan that wouldn’t help much to those in the northern lands. Go on, rise to the challenge, come up with a better alternative, not much point counting the spots, if they don’t do anything.
If it wasn’t for the big blast in the 1720’s, now we would have been 300 years down the slope towards the next Ice Age. It is a good thing that the ‘Nordic growl’ is picking up again in the last 5 or so years, after going ominously quiet in the previous decade. The above mentioned delay means some cooling by and in the 2020s, before we may warm up again.
Correlation is one thing, physical understanding is something entirely different. What you dish out, it not ‘the best we have’. It is numerology with no basis in fact. Whether you pay attention, is irrelevant.
If Trump wins, we have Global Cooling.
Either way, taxes will increase to pay off the Won’t-Workers
Is there a link to English?
Thank you
http://www.sidc.be/silso/home
Two “here” links to German.
Is there a link to English?
The following is from the link read last sentence of first paragraph
michael
For another ‘hammer on Karl’ see my recent guest post here on karlization, including my comment correction since did not originally catch the 2014 NOAA graph axis label mistake. A ‘Write slower, proof more’ lesson.
I read your contributions, I don’t always comment. Different knowledge and skill set.
respectfully
michael
Von Bismarck said of Bavaria, … Ah, that lies between Austria and civilization. Well, I get Austrian German no problem, no different than ‘hoch Deutsch’ (Prussian/ Berlin) or Platte Deutsche (Hamburg and north). Now Swiss German… Bavarians consider a ‘Halts Krankheit’ aka a throat disease.
So now you know some of the many German dialectical jokes that were thrown around locally (and frequently) in my former part of the world. Gruess Gott.
That’s right, dp. Maybe. That’s not the first time I’ve written something poorly and I may be wrong, but prove me wrong with data. No one knows as any correlations have proved spurious to this point.
You seem to be arguing for Svensmark’s Hypothesis, which remains highly controversial, as does the net effect of clouds, without regard to Svensmark. We don’t know enough about clouds.
Apparently you didn’t read this:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/02/08/a-tsi-driven-solar-climate-model/
Let’s cut to the chase: Where are the Sunspot/climate correlations back to 1700? Decadal scales don’t cut it. What about TSI and climate? Any other Solar metric?
——-
Ian W says:
Do you have a neat explanation for these significant climate changes which predate industrial level CO2 emissions, that does not involve the Sun?
——————
No. I don’t have one involving the Sun, either. Nor have I seen any correlation with TSI, or any Solar parameter, that doesn’t fall apart at some point.
—-
The whole “it’s the Sun” thing is unproven and highly controversial. Maybe I missed the proof… take me to task and prove me wrong. Let’s see the proof. If you are right, it shouldn’t be hard to prove me wrong… I’m just a man in the world, claiming no credentials, or such beyond layman’s interest.
————
Thanks.
For me, studies related to GCR hold great promise for explaining many of the great unknowns in climate research. The Sun is likely the strongest influence, but there are still so many unknowns, such as the variances with GCRs, themselves. Such drivers as the Solar System’s oscillation above/below the galactic plane and movement through the galaxy are known, but still we are in shallow waters.
At this point, GCR research is interesting, mostly unknown, but bringing us closer to the truth of things than we were before.
February 11, 2016 at 3:11 pm
The simple refutation is if dead sun – frozen earth, if supernova sun – cinder earth
……………
That’s quite a context. Aren’t you the clever one.
The planet will likely have lost all its Hydrogen long before either of those events.
http://tinyurl.com/pjx29ke
Click on ‘globe’ – green spot gives – Position, Wind direction & speed, Temperature.
Click on ‘about’ for more details.
Blue = 0 to-30°C, Red = -30 to -60°C
Green = 0 to +10°C, yellow/green = +10 to +20°C, Brown = +20 to +60°C
–
“about CO2 concentrations
It does not seem to be relying on OCO2 data , which is surely the latest and best available.
And what language might this GOD understand?
Hint: Money talks.
Science walks.
And blind faith speaks loudest of all.
Those gators are like big pussycats, snakes hear you coming and go the other way if you stomp around loudly, and there are almost zero mosquitos at the beach or in well sprayed snow-bird communities.
As for Americans, that can be hard to locate amongst the hoards of Canadians snow birds this time of year.
But you can spot natives some if you know how to look: They are the ones who occasionally obey traffic laws, and they rarely drive a huge bus pulling a car with seventeen bikes attached to it.
Wrote about spurious correlation using a magnificent MIT example in The Arts of Truth, statistics chapter. US. Sec. Agriculture under Obama used U. Iowa statistics to claim corn ethanol had reduced US gas prices $1.37 in 2011 from what they would otherwise have been. Absurd on its face, as the ethanol blendwall is 10% and US gasoline did not cost $13.70/ gallon in 2011. The same spurious correlation also proves that if the US had stopped using ethanol in gasoline in 2011, then UK unemployment would have dropped 47%.
The topical relevance to CAGW is obvious. U. Iowa researchers are as motivated to support corn ethanol as mainstream climate scientists are to support CAGW. And the motivation is simple. Money.
They attack Karl’s SST modification among other things.
Consider ENSO. Sun heats tropical Pacific, and the Hadley cell induced tradewinds pile that warm water up in the western tropical Pacific. Now when that ‘pile’ gets big enough, it sloshes back east as a Kelvin wave. Accompanied by a weakening or even reversal of the tradewinds. El Nino. Runs its sloshing course, and the reverse sets in, La Nina.
Bathtubs can teach climate sciece some useful things. Over to Bob Tisdale for details.
As a canadian living north of the 60th parallel I too wish for AGW, it would feel so good.
Unfortunately it looks like the only way to prevent the return of the great ice sheets would be a solar mirror focused on Hudson Bay.
Not sure if direct sunlight or infrared only would work best, but if the bay stays frozen Year round,everything north of New York is doomed.
Our remarkably stable climate is regulated by these massive bodies of water, so what length of solar low activity would it take to see a measurable global temperature drop?
Assuming we can calculate such a metric.
Does anybody know how somebody would go about calibrating 3 instruments, miles apart, if you are trying to detect tiny movements in time and space ?
presumably you would have to calibrate for what you are looking for ?
all this cosmology stuff sometimes seems to me to be like the climate change stuff.
At least, I think it was one.”
Now build two of these as far apart as possible. 1. Cancels local vibrational residue. They should both get a gravity wave signal. 2. Delta signal timing (speed of light atomic clocks are no big deal anymore, else GPS would not work) probes the other general relativity gravity wave prediction, that spacetime gravity waves only travel at the speed of light. Both predictions confirmed by this event, and to the predicted values. Bravo for science here. Another BIG confirmation of general relativity. Now if we could only unify general relativity with quantum theory…
the odd cycle No. 25 violated the law GO
http://system.solaire.free.fr/soleilactivite.htm
http://la.climatologie.free.fr/soleil/soleil2.htm#g-o
against jan 2009 to now, monthly sunspots…….almost exactly the same!
Cycle 12 is pretty similar also.
http://www.spaceweather.com/images2016/11feb16/hmi1898.gif?PHPSESSID=aa57e6o3jh9menqlc62a5ligu6
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/288826889_THE_HURST_EXPONENT_OF_SUNSPOT_COUNTS_A_NOTE
nonsense.
2015 1361.4321
2014 1361.3966
2013 1361.3587
2016 1361.2854
2012 1361.2413
2011 1361.0752
2003 1361.0292
2004 1360.9192
2010 1360.8027
2005 1360.7518
2006 1360.6735
2007 1360.5710
2009 1360.5565
2008 1360.5382
Except that it is not. What we should demand is an explanation for why it is not cooling.
We do know how this works.
http://spaceweather.com/images2016/11feb16/hmi1898.gif?PHPSESSID=otddd9qi6ultlaj7b16mhh53t1
The cycle is not dead at all.
Total nonsense. Here is the view of the solar disk today in the single frequency of 6173Å :
But a pseudo-scientist like you never does that, right? I mean, if you understand everything perfectly from a holistic view [as you claim you do], changing your mind would not make sense.
Recent helioseismology analysis has determined that motion in the solar convection zone is a hundred times smaller than expected based on the standard solar model.
I am the great expert on all things solar and you cannot find anything valid about the Sun that I’m not familiar with.The wording in the paper is very misleading for the uninitiated. What was found was that the Rossby number: the ratio of convective velocity to the speed of rotation is low and that convection is thus strongly influenced by the Coriolis force. This is a problem for some numerical models of the convection, which just shows that those need to be improved. This is not the same as to say that the ‘standard model’ must be rejected. The standard model is extremely successful.
Assertions like that are not science, but wishful thinking.
Germany, and are in very good condition. Arlt (2008) has recently photographed the drawings.
See e.g. http://www.leif.org/research/Recount-of-Staudach.pdf
Later records are similarly photographed and have been published long ago.
James A. Marusek
2009
We are approaching a period when the sun is going quiet. In the past, these periods with
few sunspots, such as the Dalton Minimum, Maunder Minimum, & Spörer Minimum, produced
decades of global cooling, famine and plagues. This paper provides an analysis of the global cooling
threat.
I. Solar Cycles
Solar activity, visible by the number of sunspots, varies over a cycle of approximately 11 years. This
variation is defined as a solar sunspot cycle. The periodic cycle begins at a solar minimum, peaks at a solar
maximum and then falls back down to the next solar minimum. The International Sunspot Index is used to
define the beginning and end of each solar cycle. Currently the Earth is in a solar minimum transitioning
into Solar Cycle 24.
The Sun undergoes a magnetic pole reversal approximately once every 11 years. The Sun’s magnetic field is
normally dipolar but during solar maximum, quadrupole and octupole components exist as well.
It has been suggested that the sunspot cycle is related to the planetary cycle of the four major planets: Jupiter,
Saturn, Uranus and Neptune.1 There are three centers of mass that are of interest, the sun, the major planets,
and the solar system. Approximately once every eleven years, the four major planets are grouped ahead of
the sun as the solar system moves through galactic space. This causes the sun to occupy a reciprocal position
Figure 1. Image of Solar Cycle 23 from the Solar and Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO)
by Steele Hill (NASA GSFC).
Impact 2009
1
1 Nuclear Physicist and Engineer, U.S. Department of the Navy, retired
on the opposite side of the solar system’s center of mass. About eleven years later the major planets are
grouped behind the sun causing it to occupy a reciprocal position ahead of the solar system’s center of mass.
The sun therefore alternately accelerates as it moves forward through galactic space and then decelerates to
occupy a position behind the solar system’s center of mass. All this occurs while the solar system as a whole
moves forward through galactic space. The acceleration and deceleration cause the sun to wobble in its path.
The wobble creates turbulence in the sun’s interior, which is characterized by changes in sunspot activity.
II. The Quiet Sun – “Grand Minima”
The sun exhibits great variability in the strength of each solar cycle. This activity ranges from the extremely
quiet “Grand Minima” such as the Maunder Minimum (1645-1715 A.D.) to a very active “Grand Maxima”
such as the enhanced activity observed during most of the 20th century (1940-2000 A.D.). High energy
galactic cosmic rays enter Earth’s atmosphere collide with sufficient force to cause a nuclear spallation
reaction with atmospheric molecules. Some of the fission products include radionuclides 14C and 10Be,
which settle down on Earth’s surface. Their concentration can be measured in ice cores, allowing a
reconstruction of solar activity levels into the distant past.
The sun’s magnetic field wrapped in the solar winds deflects galactic cosmic rays trying to enter the solar
system and is therefore responsible for modulating production of these radioactive isotopes. Usoskin et al.
details the reconstruction of solar activity during the Holocene period from 10,000 B.C. to the present.2
Refer to Figure 2.
The reconstructions indicate that the overall level of solar activity since the middle of the 20th century stands
amongst the highest of the past 10,000 years. This time period was a very strong “Grand Maxima”.
Typically these grand maxima are short-lived lasting in the order of 50 years. The reconstruction also
reveals “Grand Minima” epochs of suppressed activity, of varying durations have occurred repeatedly over
that time span. A solar Grand Minima is defined as a period when the (smoothed) sunspot number is less
than 15 during at least two consecutive decades. The sun spends about 17 percent of the time in a Grand
Minima state.
Figure 2. Sunspot activity throughout the Holocene. Blue and red areas denote grand minima
and maxima, respectively. The entire series is spread out over two panels for better visibility.2
Impact 2009
2
A “Grand Minima’ state can last for several decades. Approximately 27 “Grand Minima” have occurred
during the Holocene covering the past 12,000 years. The following table identifies the approximate dates
and durations of these “Grand Minima”.2
Center of
Grand Minima
Duration
1680 A.D.
80 years
1470 A.D. 160 years
1305 A.D. 70 years
1040 A.D. 60 years
685 A.D. 70 years
360 B.C. 60 years
765 B.C. 90 years
1390 B.C. 40 years
2860 B.C. 60 years
3335 B.C. 70 years
3500 B.C. 40 years
3625 B.C. 50 years
3940 B.C. 60 years
4225 B.C. 30 years
4325 B.C.
50 years
5260 B.C. 140 years
5460 B.C. 60 years
5620 B.C. 40 years
5710 B.C. 20 years
5985 B.C. 30 years
6215 B.C. 30 years
6400 B.C. 80 years
7035 B.C. 50 years
7305 B.C. 30 years
7515 B.C. 150 years
8215 B.C. 110 years
9165 B.C. 150 years
III. Galactic Cosmic Rays
Galactic Cosmic Rays (GCRs) are high-energy charged particles that originate outside our solar system.
About 85 percent are protons (nuclei of hydrogen atoms), 12 percent alpha particles (helium nuclei) and the
remainder are electrons and the nuclei of heavier atoms. The energy levels of GCRs observed in deep space
generally lie in the 100 MeV (million electron volts) to 10 GeV (billion electron volts) range. Above 1 GeV,
the particle flux rate decreases significantly according to a power law with an exponent of approximately 2.5.
Cosmic rays are produced when a star exhausts its nuclear fuel and explodes into a supernova. These stars
are generally new short-lived blue stars of the spectral type O (20-100 solar masses) or blue-white stars of
spectral type B (3-20 solar masses).
Impact 2009
3
Figure 3. Pictorial of GCR interaction with the Sun’s Heliosphere.
The Sun’s magnetic field modulates the GCR flux rate on Earth. Just as cosmic rays are deflected by the
magnetic fields in interstellar space, they are also affected by the interplanetary magnetic field embedded in
the solar wind (the plasma of ions and electrons blowing from the solar corona at about 400 km/sec), and
therefore have difficulty reaching the inner solar system. The effects from the solar winds are felt at distance
approximately 200 AU from the sun, in a region of space known as the Heliosphere. Refer to Figure 3.
The relationship between solar cycles and GCR flux rate at the Earth’s surface is shown in Figure 4. Rz is the
Sunspot Number. J is the cosmic ray flux. This flux rate measured energetic galactic cosmic rays in the
energy range of 145-440 MeV using ground based neutron monitors. During solar maximum the GCR flux
rate is at its minimum. During solar minimums, the GCR flux rate increases significantly. The graph covers
the period from 1974-2001.
Figure 4. Sunspot Cycle vs. GCR flux rate.3
Impact 2009
4
IV. Clouds
The sun is a major influence on climate change on Earth in that it provides solar irradiance that warms the
planet and a far reaching magnetic field that shields Earth from the effects of galactic cosmic rays, which
cools the planet. The magnetic field wrapped in the solar winds modulates the flux rate of cosmic rays which
affects cloud formation and thereby the planet’s global albedo. Past studies have shown a relationship
between the flux rate of galactic cosmic rays and low-level ocean cloud formation.
Research by Nigel Marsh, Henrik Svensmark and Eigil Friis-Christensen provides a good foundation in
understanding the relationship between galactic cosmic rays and cloud formation.4,5,6
When GCRs collide with the Earth’s atmosphere, they release in nuclear collision a cascade of secondary
particles (protons, neutrons and muons), which continue to penetrate deeper and deeper into the atmosphere.
This cascading effect continues until the particle’s energy falls too low to undergo further collisions. This
generally ends around 16 kilometers above the Earth’s surface in the lower atmosphere. The ions produced
within the troposphere by cosmic rays are important element of aerosol production. In the troposphere,
ionization contributes to gas-particle formation of ultra fine (<20nm) aerosols that build into cloud
condensation nuclei (CCN). Charged raindrops are ten to a hundred times more efficient in capturing
aerosols than uncharged drops. In slightly supersaturated water vapor, when aerosol is dissolved in the tiny
haze particles the droplets’ vapor pressure lowers, which increases droplet growth. The water vapor
condenses into larger water droplets that form clouds.
Earth’s ocean cloud cover is strongly correlated with GCR flux modulated by solar cycle variations. Refer to
Figure 5.
Figure 5. A strong correlation between Galactic Cosmic Rays (GCRs) and Earth’s cloud cover.
Figure shows cosmic rays fluxes from Climax (thick curve) plotted against four satellite cloud data
sets over the ocean. Triangles are the Nimbus-7 data, squares are the ISCCP-C2 data, diamonds are
the DMSP data, and crosses are the ISCCP-D2 data.6
Low clouds tend to be optically thick and are efficient at reflecting sunlight back into space. An increase in
low altitude clouds will result in planetary cooling. GCRs are a very effective amplifying mechanism for
climate forcing because the energy needed to change cloudiness is small compared with the resulting changes
in solar radiation received at the Earth’s surface.
Impact 2009
5
Interestingly, during the 20th Century, the Sun’s magnetic field which shields Earth from cosmic rays more
than doubled, thereby reducing the average influx of cosmic rays. The resulting reduction in cloudiness,
especially of low-altitude clouds, may be a significant factor in the global warming Earth has undergone
during the last century.
In 2006, the Danish National Space Center in Copenhagen conducted experimental studies of aerosol
nucleation in air, containing trace amounts of ozone, sulfur dioxide and water vapor at concentrations
representative of Earth’s atmosphere over the oceans. Their experiments confirmed the causal mechanism by
which cosmic rays facilitate the production of clouds in Earth’s atmosphere.7 Specifically the experiments
showed that (1) stable cloud aerosol clusters were formed in the presence of ions, (2) the nucleation rate was
proportional to the ion density, (3) the characteristic time for producing stable clusters was very short (2
seconds or less).
V. Global Temperature
Historically observations show the strength of the Sun’s magnetic field is not constant. One gauge of this
variation in solar magnetic field intensity is visible in sunspot activity. The Maunder Minimum (1645-1715
A.D.) provides insight into the influence of the Sun’s magnetic field on natural global climate change on
Earth. Refer to Figure 6. During the 30-year period from 1672-1699 A.D., there were less than 50 sunspots
detected, whereas during the past century over the same period between 40,000-50,000 sunspots appeared.
During the Maunder Minimum, the solar wind was depressed, which allowed greater penetration of GCRs
into the inner solar system. This period of minimal solar magnetic field resulted in a prolonged period of
greater cloud cover producing a significant decline in Earth’s temperature. The Maunder Minimum which is
referred to as the Little Ice Age is noted as one of the coldest periods during the past 2,000 years.
Figure 6. From 1645-1715 A.D, the sun’s magnetic field went quiet. This was known as the
Maunder Minimum. This plot shows the variation in the number of observed sunspots during the
time period 1600-1800 A.D. The red curve is the Wolf sunspot number, and the purple line a count
of sunspot groups based on a reconstruction by D.V. Hoyt. The green crosses are aurora counts,
based on a reconstruction by K. Krivsky and J.P. Legrand.
Impact 2009
6
The oceans are the key to unlocking the mysteries of climate change. About 70 percent of the Earth’s surface
is covered in water, which absorbs sunlight and warms. The oceans act as a large planetary heat sink because
they retain heat better than land masses. Considering the available data, it is clear that the oceans warmed
over the 20th Century by about the same amount as the atmosphere. This agreement should not be entirely
surprising as 70 percent of the mean global air temperature comes from over oceans. The inconvenient truth
that is generally ignored, is that the atmosphere is not capable of warming the oceans to any significant
degree – 99.9 percent of ocean heat is derived from sunlight at wavelengths less than 3 microns. The balance
is mostly from heat leaking from the interior of the Earth. The Greenhouse Effect involves a delay in the loss
of infra-red radiation at wavelengths greater than 5 microns.8
Variations in the amount of sunlight reaching the oceans control the rate at which the oceans warm. This is
influenced at long time scales by changes in the Earth’s orbit. At short time scales there are changes in the
amount of solar irradiance associated with the sunspot cycle. These changes are small. However, the main
driver in climate change is the amount of cloud and ice cover. Clouds and sea ice reflect sunlight before it
can be absorbed by the oceans, and is referred to as albedo. Albedo changes have a greater influence on
climate than the Greenhouse Effect. Oceans lose heat through evaporation (53 percent), infra-red radiation
(41 percent) and conduction (6 percent). The Greenhouse Effect can slow the loss of the infra-red radiation,
thereby warming the atmosphere but not the oceans. However, evaporation accounts for more than half the
heat loss. Evaporation produces clouds, and hence there is a feedback loop – warming the oceans results in
more evaporation, producing more clouds, which increases albedo, which cools the oceans. This is exactly
what was observed during The Tropical Ocean Global Atmosphere Coupled Ocean Atmosphere Response
Experiment (TOGA COARE) that was set up to investigate the Pacific Warm Pool – the warmest ocean water
in the western equatorial Pacific Ocean. COARE also found that rainfall would cool the ocean surface, so
increased evaporation producing rain is another feedback loop.8
What does this have to do with the 20th Century? Well the observed climate change is consistent with
variations in albedo and associated ocean warming and cooling, suggesting that it is just a natural cycle. This
pattern of behavior is evident in paleoclimate data for most of the last 10,000 years. None of this is
simulated in climate models..
Is the link between the intensity of the sun’s magnetic field and surface ocean temperature quantifiable?
Because the area represented by the oceans is large; a long-term change in low level clouds over the ocean
should have a significant effect on planetary temperature. Most of the natural background radiation over the
oceans is derived from cosmic radiation rather than natural sources. As a result, the effect of GCR cloud
modulation is greatest over the oceans where there is less dust to form clouds and there is a shortage of cloud
forming ions. Rain removes the ions, so they must be constantly replenished.
One method of measuring the sun’s magnetic strength is by measuring the production of sunspots. But
Georgieva recommends a better method by measuring the ability of the magnetic field wrapped in the solar
winds to interact and distort the Earth’s magnetic field. The high speed solar wind stream is produced by
Coronal Mass Ejections, Coronal Holes and Magnetic Clouds. The geomagnetic activity reflects the impact
of solar activity originating from both closed and open magnetic field regions on the sun, so it is a better
indicator of solar magnetic activity than sunspot number which is related to only closed magnetic field
regions.9 This geomagnetic distortion has been measured at two locations on the opposite side of the globe,
one in Great Britain and the other in Australia, since 1868 A.D. This combined distortion is referred to as the
"AA index". Figure 7 graphs global monthly ocean temperature anomalies in relationship to the “AA index”
for the past 120 years.
The relationship is described by the formula:
Ocean Surface Temperature Anomaly = 0.203 ln (AA Index) – 0.778°C (1)
Impact 2009
7
Impact 2009
8
This figure was derived using the Smith-Reynolds Extended Reconstructed Sea Surface Temperature
(ERSST.v3)10. The time series in ASCII format was accessed throughftp://eclipse.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/ersst/
pdo/ by selecting dataset aravg.mon.ocean.90S.90N.asc]. The monthly dataset aravg.mon.ocean.90S.
90N.asc was used which covers Sea Surface Temperature (SST) for the period from January 1880 to October
2007 for the entire ocean from 90° North latitude to 90° South latitude. The temperature anomalies are
computed from the analyzed monthly field minus the climatology for that month using the years 1971-2000
as a baseline. The second parameter used was the monthly “AA Index” which covers the period from
January 1868 to September 2007.11 [The time series is accessed by selecting the dataset AA_Month.] Since
major volcanic eruptions are known to affect Earth’s climate, the database provided by the Smithsonian
National Museum of Natural History on Large Holocene Eruptions was used to filter out this climatic effect.
12 All eruptions with a Volcanic Explosivity Index (VEI) of 6 or greater were identified and the temperature
data from the time of eruption until two years later were deleted from the dataset. These eruptions include
Krakatau (27 Aug. 1883), Santa Maria (24 Oct. 1902), Novarupta (6 Jun. 1912) and Pinatubo (15 Jun. 1991).
One might question if the natural log drop-off as the “AA Index” approaches zero is a real phenomena.
Figure 8 shows an ocean surface temperature reconstruction in the Sargasso Sea, a 2 million square mile
region of the Atlantic Ocean as determined by isotope ratios of marine organism remains in sediment at the
bottom of the sea. During the depths of the Little Ice Age, ocean temperatures were approximately 1°C
colder than present. Although the Maunder Minimum preceded the start of “AA Index” measurements; it is
my opinion that the Maunder Minimum represents a timeframe when this parameter approached zero. When
an “AA Index” of near-zero (0.1) is entered into equation (1); it produces a temperature drop of
approximately 1°C as compared to present day temperatures. Thus there appears to be agreement between
the formula and observed sea temperatures on the extremes of the quiet sun.
Figure 8. Surface temperatures in the Sargasso Sea, a 2 million square mile region of the Atlantic
Ocean, with time resolution of 50 to 100 years. The horizontal line is the average temperature for
this 3,000-year period. The Little Ice Age and Medieval Climate Optimum were naturally
occurring, extended intervals of climate departures from the mean.13
This leads to the observation that the Earth’s climate system is fairly robust. Medium to high levels of solar
magnetic fields produce fairly stable warm temperatures. Only when the sun is magnetically quiet does
temperature take a dramatic plunge.
Impact 2009
9
VI. Global Cooling Threat
In the Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) theory according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (IPCC); the sun and Earth’s cloud cover play only minor roles in climate change. In the AGW
theory, rising atmospheric carbon dioxide levels cause rising temperatures on Earth. But actual temperatures
have been falling. From the peak year 1998, the lower Troposphere temperatures globally has fallen around
1/2 degrees Celsius. (1998 vs. 2008) This is despite the fact that during that same time period, atmospheric
carbon dioxide has risen 5 percent from 367 ppm to 386 ppm. The AGW theory failed to predict this trend.
Some might argue that weather is being confused with climate. The range of this data is over ten years. I
assert that a decade of global temperatures represents a climate change and 1/2 degrees Celsius is too
significant to be ignored. The AGW theory is hinged on untested (unvalidated) computer models. These
falling temperatures occurred at the same time as the sun went quiet as it is transitioning into Solar Cycle 24.
This observation conforms to the Natural Global Cooling (NGC) theory. The NGC theory has a long history
of defining past climate changes, a history of observed cooling events such as the Dalton Minimum,
Maunder Minimum, Spörer Minimum and Wolf Minimum. Any warming theorized by AGW appears to be
insignificant in comparison to the large rapid fall observed in lower Tropospheric temperature being driven
naturally by the weakening solar magnetic field during this solar minimum.
Climate change is primarily driven by nature. It has been true in the days of my father and his father and all
those that came before us. Because of science, not junk science, we have slowly uncovered some of the
fundamental mysteries of nature. Our Milky Way galaxy is awash with cosmic rays. These are high speed
charged particles that originate from exploding stars. Because they are charged, their travel is strongly
influenced by magnetic fields. Our sun produces a magnetic field that extends to the edges of our solar
system. This magnetic field is wrapped in the solar winds.
This field deflects many of the cosmic rays away from Earth. But when the sun goes quiet (minimal
sunspots), this field collapses inward allowing cosmic rays to penetrate deeper into our solar system. As a
result, far greater numbers collide with Earth and penetrate down into the lower atmosphere where they
ionize small particles of moisture (humidity) forming them into water droplets that become clouds. Low
level clouds reflect sunlight back into space. An increase in Earth's cloud cover produce a global drop in
temperature. These periods of quiet sun are referred to as a Grand Minima. The Maunder Minimum
(1645-1715) and the Dalton Minimum (1790-1830) are examples.
During a Grand Minima the Earth begins to slowly cool. The start of the planting season is delayed and in
the fall early frost limits the harvest. Earthʼs abundant bounty is put on hold and starvation takes its ghastly
grip. Historian, John D. Post, referred to the last period of quiet sun, the Dalton Minimum, as the “last great
subsistence crisis in the Western world”. With the cold came massive crop failures, food riots, famine and
disease.
Several scientists including David Hathaway (NASA)14, William Livingston & Matthew Penn (National
Solar Observatory)15, Khabibullo Abdusamatov (Russian Academy of Science)16, Cornelis de Jager (The
Netherlands) & S. Duhau (Argentina)17 and Theodor Landscheidt (Germany)18, have forecasted that the sun
may enter a period similar to the Dalton Minimum or a more severe “Grand Minima” a decade from now in
Solar Cycle 25.
A few scientists including David C. Archibald (Australia)19 and M. A. Clilverd (Britain)20 have warned this
might even begin in Solar Cycle 24. We are at the transition into Solar Cycle 24 and this cycle has already
shown itself to be unusually quiet. The number of spotless days (days without sunspots) during this solar
minimum appears to be tracking 3 times the typical number observed during the last century (Solar Cycles
16-23).
Impact 2009
10
There are several lessons learned from studying very early global cooling events in Europe. Lessons learned
include:
* Onset of these conditions can be very abrupt and very severe.
* A decline in food production due to:
– Dramatic increase in days with overcast skies.
– Decline in the intensity of sunlight.
– Decline by several degrees in global temperature
– Regions of massive rainfall and flooding
– Limited regions experienced droughts
– Shortened growing season
* A string of major and minor famines
* Malnutrition lead to weakened immune system. Produced influenza epidemics.
* Reoccurrence of plagues such as the Black Plague.
* Lack of feed for livestock
* Parasites (i.e. fusarium nivale), which thrived under snow cover, devastated crops.
* Grain storage in cool damp conditions produced fungus (Ergot Blight). Contaminated grains when
consumed caused an illness (St. Anthony’s Fire) producing convulsions, hallucinations, gangrenous
rotting of extremities.
* Flooding created swamplands that became mosquito breeding grounds and introduced tropical diseases such
as malaria throughout Europe.
* During hot summers, cold air aloft produced killer hailstorms (hailstones that could kill a cow).
* Higher frequency of powerful storms produced major devastations.
* Glacier advance swallowed up entire alpine villages.
* Ruptured glacial ice dams produced deadly floods.
Temperatures are already falling. The main threat from a “Dalton Minimum” or “Maunder Minimum” event
is famine and starvation (affecting millions or hundreds of millions worldwide) due to shortened growing
seasons and harsher weather. In the past, in addition to great famines, this cold harsh weather has also lead to
major epidemics.
Historical Pattern of Cold Weather Associated with a Quiet Sun
Historical evidence exists of the Mississippi River, Ohio River, Allegheny River, Delaware River and
Hudson River at the New York Harbor freezing and of very harsh winters.
A few decades after the Dalton Minimum
In the spring Eliza, a slave, carrying her young son, fled from Kentucky by crossing the
Ohio River on foot. The river was “swollen and turbulent, great cakes of floating ice were
swinging heavily to and fro in the turbid waters.” She leaped from one chunk of ice to the
next until she reached freedom on the Ohio shore.21 [Harriet Beecher Stowe lived in
Cincinnati, Ohio from 1832 to 1850. In 1851, she wrote “Uncle Tom’s Cabin”. Her life in
Ohio was intertwined in this work of fiction.]
During the Dalton Minimum
The Hudson River at the New York Harbor froze, enabling people to walk across the ice
from Manhattan to Staten Island. The Hudson froze over completely during particularly
brutal winter of 1779/1780, when the surface was solid for five weeks straight and the
British rolled cannons over the ice. In 1821, taverns were constructed in the middle of the
river to offer warmth and refreshment to pedestrians.22,23
During the Dalton Minimum
From 1803 to 1806, Captains Lewis and Clark lead a transcontinental expedition to explore
the greater Northwest. During the winter of 1804/1805, the explorers set up a winter base
camp near the Big Knife River near what is today the town of Bismarck, North Dakota.
The winter was bitterly cold. There were 6 days with temperatures of -31°F or lower.
These occurred in 1804 on December 12 (-38°F), December 17 (-45°F), December 18
(-32°F), in 1805 on January 10 (-40°F), January 11 (-38°F), and January 13 (-34°F).
Compare this to the current low temperatures of Bismarck, North Dakota in which only one
Impact 2009
11
day in the past decade fell below -30°F. On January 15, 2009 the temperature fell to
-44°F.24,25
During the Dalton Minimum
Early settlers routinely waited till winter to cross the frozen Mississippi river in their wagon
trains. In 1799, George Frederick Bollinger led a group of early pioneers from North
Carolina to establish early settlements in Missouri. They hoped to cross their largest
obstacle, the Mississippi River, on the ice, frozen solid in mid-winter. They arrived on the
east bank of the Mississippi river opposite St. Genevieve in late December, pitched camp
and explored potential river crossings. St. Genevieve is located about a hundred miles
downstream from St. Louis. Daily the thickness of the ice was measured and then on
December 31, a chopped hole in the ice indicated thickness well over two feet. The next
day the settlers successfully drove their heavy loaded wagons across the river.26
Between the Dalton Minimum and the Maunder Minimum
December 1776 was a desperate time for George Washington and the American Revolution.
During the night of December 25, Washington led his small Continental army of 2,400
troops from Pennsylvania across the Delaware River made dangerous and barely navigable
by huge chunks of ice. Once across they launched a surprise attack on the Britain's Hessian
mercenaries at Trenton, New Jersey, capturing 1,000 prisoners and seizing muskets,
powder, and artillery.27,28
Between the Dalton Minimum and the Maunder Minimum
In Boston, Massachusetts on February 22, 1772, Anna, a young school girl, writes in her
diary “Since about the middle of December, we have had till this week, a series of cold and
stormy weather – every snow storm (of which we have had abundance) except the first,
ended with rain, by which means the snow was so hardened that the strong gales at
northwest soon turned it, and all above ground to ice.” In some streets about town this
mixture of ice and snow is 5 feet thick. On March 11, she writes that the snow is now 7 feet
deep in some places around her house.29
Between the Dalton Minimum and the Maunder Minimum
Just before the opening battles of the French and Indian War in December 1753, George
Washington, then 21 years old, crossed the Allegheny River. In their first attempt,
Washington and a guide used a raft to cross the ice-choked river and this ended in disaster
as Washington was knocked overboard in deep water and saved himself only by catching
the raft as it swept by. The severe cold that night froze their clothes and the guide's fingers.
The river also froze, however, allowing them to walk across on the ice the next morning.
Soon they reached the safety of an English trader's settlement.30
During the Maunder Minimum
During the Great Frost of (1683–1684) in England, the River Thames was completely
frozen for two months, the ice was 11 inches thick at London. Sea ice was reported along
the coasts of southeast England, and ice prevented the use of many harbors. The sea froze,
so that ice formed for a time between Dover and Calais, joining England and France. (It is
more likely that the shorelines froze and a great mass of densely packed icebergs, some 11
feet thick, built up along the coastlines fusing into a semi-rigid structure that may have
connected the two shorelines together.) The Thames was recorded to have frozen over at
London during the years: 1649, 1655, 1663, 1666, 1667, 1684, 1695, 1709, and
1716.31,32,33,34
During the Little Ice Age, growing seasons in England and Continental Europe generally
became short and unreliable, which led to shortages and famine. These hardships were
nothing compared to the more northerly countries: Glaciers advanced rapidly in Greenland,
Iceland, Scandinavia and North America, making vast tracts of land uninhabitable. The
Arctic pack ice extended so far south that several reports describe Eskimos landing their
kayaks in Scotland. Finland’s population fell by one-third, Iceland’s by half, the Viking
colonies in Greenland were abandoned altogether, as were many Inuit communities.35
Impact 2009
12
During the Spörer Minimum
By 1518, early explorers made significant progress in probing and surveying the New
World. They described North America as a “land of frozen seas, horrid, barren and scarcely
habitable for cold”. “In the New World, cold predominates. The rigor of the frigid zone
extends over half of those regions which should be temperate by their position. Countries
where the grape and the fig should ripen, are buried under snow one half of the year; and
lands situated in the same parallel with the most fertile and best cultivated provinces in
Europe, are chilled with perpetual frosts, which almost destroy the power of vegetation.”36
VII. Plague Causal Relationship
Great famines and plagues appeared together historically, not only because malnourished populations are
more susceptible to disease but because they share a common causal link. I assert that the plagues did not
just coincide with past global cooling events but were directly spawned by the increasing levels of GCR
radiation. Two examples, which appeared at the onset of both the Dark Ages and the beginning of the Little
Ice Age, are the Yersinia Pestis bacillus, and the Rinderpest virus.
Radiation is a powerful mutagen. The long-term effects of radiation are genetic alteration, cancer induction,
damage to the central nervous system and peripheral neurons and accelerated aging. Densely ionizing
radiation like alpha particles or heavier ions generate a greater biological effect than the same dose of X-rays.
X-rays can produce isolated single and double DNA strand breaks, which can be repaired by the cells rather
quickly and cleanly. Proton and ion radiation produces complex cluster damage to the DNA strands that are
significantly less repairable. A macroscopic tumor may originate from only one transformed cell. If a single
mutated cell survives, cancer may develop.
The primary means that multicellular organisms utilize to repair radiation damage is to identify and discard
the affected cell and manufacture replacements. But single cell organisms do not have that luxury. As a
result, many single cell organisms have evolved very complex and redundant repair mechanisms that ensure
their survivability even under higher levels of radiation damage. The most resistant organisms are singlestranded
viruses, followed by double-stranded viruses, bacteria, algae and yeast. Under nuclear radiation,
many of these single cell organisms will mutate and survive. The genetic variations will spawn new mutated
single cell organisms that are extremely virulent and deadly especially to the future host they infect. That is
why great plagues are intertwined with the great famines at the onset of major global cooling events.
Sensitivity of Prokaryotic and Eukaryotic Organisms to Radiation
Name Species D0 (Grays)
T1-phange Virus 2600
Escherichia. coli B/r Bacteria 30
Bacillus subtilis cells Bacillus 33
Saccharomyces cerevisiae Yeast 150
Chlamydomonas Algae 24
Human Human 1.4
D0 is defined as the dose necessary to reduce survival to 1/e (37%). Gray is a unit of measure
defined as 1 joule per kilogram of absorbed radiation.37
This table shows that typically viruses, bacteria and bacilli can survive the damage from greater ionizing
radiation exposure than many multicellular organisms. But very high energy GCRs will damage these
organisms producing new mutated and lethal strains.
Water is a natural shield to nuclear radiation. These genetic mutations are most likely to occur where the
Earth’s natural atmospheric shielding is thinest, and the air is the driest, such as the high deserts.
Impact 2009
13
Rinderpest
An extremely virulent variant of Rinderpest struck animals immediately at the onset of the first Little Ice Age
in 1315 A.D. producing an animal plague that wiped out vast herd of oxen, sheep, goats, camels, buffaloes,
yaks, etc. In several large herds, only a couple animals survived. This plague was also present during the
Dark Ages that began in 536 A.D.
Black Death (Bubonic Plague)
Yersinia Pestis is a pathogen that has undergone large-scale genetic flux. Global cooling at the beginning of
the Dark Ages began in 536 A.D. An outbreak of the Bubonic Plague struck Constantinople 6 years later. It
was caused by a very deadly variant of the Yersinia Pestis bacillus that used fleas (and rats) as a plague
transport mechanism. This plague was referred to as the Plague of Justine. As it swept from the Middle East
to the Mediterranean Basin, approximately 50 percent of population perished.
Global cooling at the beginning of the Little Ice Age began in 1315 A.D. An outbreak of the Bubonic Plague
struck the Chinese Gobi Desert 15 years later. This deadly variant of the Yersinia Pestis bacillus killed 35
million Asians and spread westward where it killed approximately 1/3 of the European population. The
plague was known as the Black Death. It came in three variants: bubonic plague, primary septicemic plague,
and the pneumonic plague. To date, this deadly bacillus has been responsible for 200 million human deaths.
The flea/rat/human plague route still exists today. The Earth is a fertile ground for another great plague. If a
mutated form of the bubonic plague were to infect the rat population, the results could be devastating. For
example, it is estimated that the number of rats living in New York City is in the range of 44-96 million. The
estimated rat population in the United States may exceed 300 million.
Malaria
Another type of plague occurred during past global cooling events. But this time, instead of resulting from
genetic mutation, it was due to the GCR induced extensive flooding. The heavy rainfalls produced new
swamplands across the globe. These swamps became breeding grounds for major mosquito borne diseases
including malaria. Major malaria outbreaks occurred across Europe during the beginning of the Little Ice
Age around 1315 A.D.
Malaria is transmitted by mosquitoes. When a mosquito bites an infected person, it ingests microscopic
malaria parasites found in the person’s blood. When the mosquito then bites another person, the parasites go
from the mosquito’s mouth into the person’s blood. Within a human, the parasite goes to the liver, replicates,
and moves into the bloodstream, where it attacks red blood cells for their hemoglobin. Toxins from the
parasite are then released into the blood, making the person feel sick. Malaria produces fever and flu-like
illness, including shaking chills, headache, muscle aches, and tiredness. Nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea can
also occur. Malaria in children can produce anemia, jaundice, kidney failure, seizures, mental confusion,
coma, and death. The World Health Organization estimates that 300-500 million cases of malaria occur and
more than 1 million people die each year from malaria, mostly children in sub-Sahara Africa.
Impact 2009
14
VIII. Earth’s Magnetic Field
Weakening of the Earth’s magnetic field, fracturing the strong dipole into
several mini-pole reversals, is a strong amplifying mechanism for GCR
induced global cooling.
We live in a Great Ice Age called the Pleistocene Epoch which began around 1.8 million years ago and will
continue for several million years into the future. During an Ice Age, the Earth cycles between cold Glacial
and warm Interglacial periods. An Interglacial is a short warming period where the Earth thaws between the
icy grips of the glacial periods. The present interglacial period (the Holocene) began approximately 12,000
years ago.
ICE AGE TRANSITIONS FOR PAST 1.5 MILLION YEARS
Holocene (interglacial, 12,000 years ago – present)
Wisconsin/Weichsel (glacial period, 110,000 – 12,000 years ago)
Sangamonian/Eemian (interglacial, 130,000 – 110,000 years ago)
Illinoian/Saale (glacial, 200,000 – 130,000 years ago)
Yarmouth/Holstein (interglacial, 300,000/380,000 – 200,000 years ago)
Kansan/Elsterian (glacial, 455,000 – 300,000/380,000 years ago)
Aftonian (interglacial, 620,000 – 455,000 years ago)
Nebraskan/Menapian (glacial, 680,000 – 620,000 years ago)
Pastonian Stage (interglacial, 800,000 – 680,000 years ago)
Pre-Pastonian Stage (glacial, 1,300,000 – 800,000 years ago)
Bramertonian Stage (interglacial, 1,550,000 – 1,300,000 years ago)
One of the predominant theories describing the cause of glacial/interglacial periods is the Milankovitch cycle
theory. According to the theory, small variations in Earth-Sun geometry change determine the amount of
sunlight each hemisphere receives during the Earth’s yearly orbital cycle around the Sun. These geometry
changes include (1) eccentricity – small variations in the changing of Earth’s orbit around the sun (circular/
oval) on a 100,000 year cycle, (2) obliquity – the tilt of Earth’s spin axis between 22 and 24 degrees every
41,000 years, and (3) precession – Earth wobbles toward and away from the Sun over the span of 19,000 to
23,000 years.
But the theory fails in describing (1) the abrupt nature of transition boundaries between glacial and
interglacial periods (sometimes occurring within a few short years, (2) because orbitally-induced changes in
the solar energy flux received by the Earth is too weak, and (3) because the actual glacial/interglacial period
lengths vary significantly from theoretical projections.
When the Earth’s magnetic field is strong, it is characterized as a dipole with a north and south magnetic pole
on opposite sides of the Earth. But when the magnetic field weakens, it often breaks down into quadrupoles,
octupoles and local magnetic field reversals (mini-pole reversals). The appearance of this complex structure
allows mini-poles to effectively cancel out the Earth’s total magnetic field reducing the overall magnetic field
strength to 10 percent or below. During this phase the local fields can reverse polarity several times before
they restructure back into a strong dipole configuration. The restructuring can lead to a global polarity
reversal or to a restoration of the normal state.
The intensity of the earth’s magnetic field has been declining. Scientific analysis of ancient pottery has
shown that the magnetic field strength has declined 50 percent in the last 4,000 years. Recently, the decline
has become very steep and pronounced. The decline in field strength at the equator has fallen 4.5 percent
during the last century. Most of this decline occurred during the last 25 years. Using the International
Geomagnetic Reference Field (IGRF) data set, the magnetic field at the equator in Open Ocean shows a
decline of 1.7 percent in intensity since 1980. (Geomag program, IGRF dataset, latitude 0 degrees, longitude
180 degrees, years 1980-2005, a decline from 34,824 to 34,246 nanoTesla (nT)).
Impact 2009
15
Dr. Heikki Nevanlinna, Research Professor at Geophysics Research, Finnish Meteorological Institute, wrote
an article in Helsingin Sanomat, the leading newspaper in Finland, July 27, 2002. In the article, he states that
the North Hemisphere magnetic pole has moved 1500 kilometers in the past 100 years while the South
Hemisphere magnetic pole has moved only 1000 kilometers during the same period. The structure of the
Earth's magnetic field is currently asymmetric.
A South Atlantic Anomaly (SAA) has appeared, which is a major depression in the magnetic field strength.
The field strength within this depression approaches only 20,000 nanoTesla (nT).38 The SAA can be
described as a large local magnetic field reversal.
The fact that Earth’s magnetic field is currently asymmetric combined with the fact that a magnetic field
depression has formed would lead one to believe that the Earth’s magnetic pole components are being
restructured.
When Earth’s magnetic field changes are viewed through the prism of GCR/cloud linkage, an interesting
observation can be made. Cloud formation due to cosmic rays is temperature dependent and therefore
latitude dependent. The earth is protected by a magnetic field that provides the greatest protection at the
equator and the weakest at the poles. But the poles are generally the coldest areas on the earth, characterized
by very low humidity. Without any moisture and heat to work with, cosmic rays are very ineffectual in
forming clouds. But on the other hand the equatorial ocean areas with heat and humidity are great breeding
grounds for massive storms, but these are the areas shielded the most by earth's magnetic field. GCR
penetration in the equatorial region is a robust mechanism for great cloud formation. Therefore as the
Earth’s magnetic field begins to weaken and localized areas of magnetic pole reversals form closer to
equatorial regions, the effects of GCR cooling greatly increases.
The Earth’s magnetic field was extremely robust during the Holocene. The abrupt strengthening in the
magnetic field coincided with the abrupt end of the last glacial period. By contrast, the last two interglacial
periods came to an end when the Earth’s magnetic field was weak and near the point of a magnetic field
reversal. I assert that the weakening of the Earth’s magnetic field will signal the end of the present Holocene
interglacial.
As the Earth’s magnetic field weakens further, other regions of magnetic field reversals will materialize.
When these regions materialize near equatorial regions where elevated moisture and heat prevail, significant
global cooling will begin driving the Earth back into the next Glacial period.
Solar “Grand Minima” occur very abruptly. I assert that these minima will occur during both glacial and
interglacial periods. The combination of a mini-pole reversal near the equatorial region with a “Grand
Minima” event can explain the abruptness seen in interglacial/glacial transitions.
References:
1. W.J.R. Alexander, F. Bailey, D.B. Bredenkamp, A van der Merwe and N. Willemse (2007) Linkages between solar activity,
climate predictability and water resource development,, Journal of the South African Institute of Civil Engineering, 49 (2), June
2007, pp. 32-44. URL: http://nzclimatescience.net/images/PDFs/alexander2707.pdf [cited 14 April 2009]
2. I.G. Usoskin, S.K. Solanki, and G.A. Kovaltsov (2007) Grand minima and maxima of solar activity: new observational
constraints, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 471, pp. 301-309, doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20077704, URL: http://cc.oulu.fi/~usoskin/
personal/aa7704-07.pdf [cited 14 April 2009]
3. S.A. Starodubtsev, I.G. Usoskin, A.V. Grigoryev and K. Mursula, (2005) Long-Term Modulation of the Cosmic Ray
Fluctuation Spectrum: Spacecraft Measurements, 29th International Cosmic Ray Conference Pune, 2, pp. 247-250. URL: http://
cc.oulu.fi/~usoskin/personal/ICRC2005_yaku.pdf [cited 27 May 2009]
4. Marsh, N. and H. Svensmark (2000) Cosmic Rays, Clouds and Climate, Space Science Review 94, pp. 215-230, URL: http://
http://www.dsri.dk/~hsv/SSR_Paper.pdf [cited 14 April 2009]
5. H. Svensmark (1998) Influence of Cosmic Rays on Earth’s Climate, Physical Review Letters, 81, 15 October 1998, pp. 5027–
5030, URL: http://www.dsri.dk/~hsv/prlresup2.pdf [cited 14 April 2009]
6. H. Svensmark, and E. Friis-Christensen (1997) Variation of cosmic ray flux and global cloud coverage – a missing link in
solar-climate relationships, Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics, 59 (11), pp. 1225-1232, URL: http://
http://www.dsri.dk/~hsv/9700001.pdf [cited 14 April 2009]
Impact 2009
16
7. H. Svensmark, J.O.P. Pedersen, N.D. Marsh, M.B. Enghoff and U.I. Uggerhoj (2007), Experimental evidence for the role of
ions in particle nucleation under atmospheric conditions, Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and
Engineering Sciences 463 (2078) pp. 385-396, doi:10.1098/rspa.2006.1773.
8. Willem de Lange, Why I am a Climate Realist, New Zealand Centre for Political Research, 23 May 2009, URL: http://
http://www.nzcpr.com/guest147.htm [cited 27 May 2009]
9. K. Georgieva, C. Bianchi and B. Kirov (2005) Once again about global warming and solar activity, Mem. S.A.It., 76 (969),
URL: http://sait.oat.ts.astro.it/MSAIt760405/PDF/2005MmSAI..76..969G.pdf [cited 3 January 2008
10. National Climate Data Center, NOAA, Extended Reconstructed Sea Surface Temperature (ERSST.v3), URL: http://
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/sst/ersstv3.php#desc [cited 8 January 2008]
11. National Climate Data Center, NOAA, Solar Data, URL:ftp://ftp.ngdc.noaa.gov/STP/SOLAR_DATA/RELATED_INDICES/
AA_INDEX/ [cited 17 December 2007].
12. Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History, Large Holocene Eruptions, URL:http://www.volcano.si.edu/world/
largeeruptions.cfm [cited 17 December 2007]
13. A.B. Robinson, N.E. Robinson, and W. Soon [2007] Environmental effects of increased atmospheric carbon dioxide, Journal of
American Physicians and Surgeons 12, pp. 79-90, URL:http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p36.htm [cited 10 January 2008]
14. Solar Cycle 25 peaking around 2022 could be one of the weakest in centuries, Physorg.com, URL: http://www.physorg.com/
pdf66581392.pdf [cited 25 May 2009]
15. W. Livingston and M. Penn, Sunspots may vanish by 2015, URL:http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/
livingston-penn_sunspots2.pdf [cited 25 May 2009]
16. Kh. I. Abdusamatov, (2007) Optimal prediction of the peak of the next 11-year activity cycle and of the peaks of several
succeeding cycles on the basis of long-term variations in the solar radius or solar constant, Kinematics and Physics of Celestial
Bodies, 23 (3), June 2007, pp. 97-100, URL:http://www.springerlink.com/content/6t76758j320636u7/ [cited 25 May 2009]
17. C. de Jager and S. Duhau, (2009) Forecasting the parameters of sunspot cycle 24 and beyond, Journal of Atmospheric and
Solar-Terrestrial Physics, 71 (2), February 2009, pp. 239-245, URL:http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?
_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6VHB-4V4KR23-5&_user=777686&_coverDate=02%2F28%2F2009&_alid=908671499&_rdoc=6&_
fmt=high&_orig=search&_cdi=6062&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_ct=152&_acct=C000043031&_version=1&_urlVersion
=0&_userid=777686&md5=b98b6ba80274218550738d993d1e7731 [cited 25 May 2009]
18. T. Landscheidt, New Little Ice Age, Instead of Global Warming?, URL:http://www.schulphysik.de/klima/landscheidt/
iceage.htm [cited 25 May 2009]
19. D. Archibald, (2006) Solar Cycles 24 and 25 and Predicted Climate Response, Energy & Environment, 17 (1), 2006, URL:
http://www.davidarchibald.info/papers/Solar%20Cycles%2024%20and%2025%20and%20Predicted%20Climate
%20Response.pdf [cited 25 May 2009]
20. M.A. Clilverd, E. Clarke, T. Ulich, H. Rishbeth, M.J. Jarvis, (2006) Predicting Solar Cycle 24 and beyond, Space Weather, 4,
S09005, doi:10.1029/2005SW000207, URL:http://users.telenet.be/j.janssens/SC24Clilverd.pdf [cited 25 May 2009]
21. Harriet Beecher Stowe, Uncle Tom’s Cabin or, Life among the Lowly, The Easton Press, Norwalk, Connecticut, 1979 edition
pp 32-41.
22. When New York Harbor Froze Over, 1779-1780, The Old Salt Bloghttp://www.oldsaltblog.com/tag/hudson-frozen/ [cited 14
April 2009]
23. D.B. Schneider, F.Y.I., The New York Times, 20 February 2000http://www.nytimes.com/2000/02/20/nyregion/fyi-859087.html?
sec=&spon= [cited 14 April 2009]
24. The Journals of the Expedition under the Command of Captains Lewis and Clark, Volume 1, The Easton Press, Norwalk,
Connecticut, 1993 edition, pp 85-98
25. Weather Underground, History of Bismarck, North Dakota,http://www.wunderground.com/history/airport/KBIS/2009/1/1/
MonthlyHistory.html?req_city=NA&req_state=NA&req_statename=NA [cited 14 April 2009]
26. The Bollinger Migration to the Louisiana Territory, part of "Bollinger Collection" compiled by Orena Bollinger in 1984 http://
freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~edfrye/bollou.html [cited 14 April 2009]
27. George Washington crossing the Delaware River by Leutze, Africans in America Resource Bank, http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/
part2/2h48.html, [cited 14 April 2009]
28. Washington's crossing of the Delaware River, Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Washington's_crossing_of_the_Delaware_River , [cited 14 April 2009]
29. Anna Green Winslow (1771-1773) Diary of a Boston School Girl, edited by Alice Morse Earle, The Riverside Press,
Cambridge, 1894, pp 32-33, 42-43.
30. Mission to the Ohio, George Washington’s Mount Vernon Estate & Gardenshttp://www.mountvernon.org/visit/plan/index.cfm/
pid/129/ [cited 14 April 2009]
31. River Thames frost fairs, Wikipedia,http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/River_Thames_frost_fairs [cited 14 April 2009]
32. Historical Weather Events 1650-1699,http://www.booty.org.uk/booty.weather/climate/1650_1699.htm [cited 14 April 2009]
33. The Great Frost of 1683-4, http://www.pastpresented.info/frost1683.htm [cited 14 April 2009]
34. Where Thames Smooth Waters Glide, http://thames.me.uk/s00051.htm [cited 14 April 2009]
35. L. Solomon, The Deniers: Our Spotless Sun, Financial Post, 31 May 2008http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fpcomment/
archive/2008/05/31/the-deniers-our-spotless-sun.aspx [cited 14 April 2009]
36. William Robertson, The History of the Discovery and Settlement of America, 1826, Jones & Company, London, pp 80-81.
37. C. Baumstark-Khan and R. Facius (2002) Life under conditions of ionizing radiation. Astrobiology. The Quest for the
Conditions of Life. Horneck, G., Baumstark-Khan, C. (Eds.), Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp. 261-284.
38. Danish Space Research Institute, Planetary Magnetic Fields, URL:http://www.dsri.dk/showpage.php3?id=65 [cited 14 April
2009]