Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

NASA/Hathaway’s updated solar cycle prediction – smallest in 100 years
watts up with that? ^ | May 2, 2012 | Anthony Watts

Posted on 05/03/2012 7:42:20 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach

…the predicted size makes this the smallest sunspot cycle in about 100 years

*********************************snip**************************

From: http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/predict.shtml

The current prediction for Sunspot Cycle 24 gives a smoothed sunspot number maximum of about 60 in the Spring of 2013. We are currently over three years into Cycle 24. The current predicted size makes this the smallest sunspot cycle in about 100 years.

The prediction method has been slightly revised. The previous method found a fit for both the amplitude and the starting time of the cycle along with a weighted estimate of the amplitude from precursor predictions (polar fields and geomagnetic activity near cycle minimum). Recent work [see Hathaway Solar Physics; 273, 221 (2011)] indicates that the equatorward drift of the sunspot latitudes as seen in the Butterfly Diagram follows a standard path for all cycles provided the dates are taken relative to a starting time determined by fitting the full cycle. Using data for the current sunspot cycle indicates a starting date of May of 2008. Fixing this date and then finding the cycle amplitude that best fits the sunspot number data yields the current (revised) prediction.

(Excerpt) Read more at wattsupwiththat.com ...


TOPICS: Conspiracy; Science; Weather
KEYWORDS: catastrophism; climatechange; globalwarming; globalwarminghoax; gorebullwarming; solarcycle; star; sun; sunspots; wecannotcontrol

1 posted on 05/03/2012 7:42:31 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: All
From the comments:

*******************************EXCERPT***********************************

Bruce of Newcastle says:

May 2, 2012 at 3:56 pm

Interesting that Dr Hathaway has a predicted solar cycle length for SC24 around 13 years from look of his graph. Suggests the following cycle will also be cool, about 1-1.5 C below average. So, temperatures look like staying down until the mid 2030′s at least.

2 posted on 05/03/2012 7:44:32 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (The Global Warming HOAX is about Global Governance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster; landsbaum; Signalman; NormsRevenge; steelyourfaith; Lancey Howard; ...

fyi


3 posted on 05/03/2012 7:45:55 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (The Global Warming HOAX is about Global Governance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Here's a sunspot chart showing the various peaks and dips throughout the past centuries. Note the "Medieval Max". It corresponds to the "Medieval Warm Period". The "Maunder Minimum" corresponds to the "Little Ice Age", and the "Modern Max" to the recent warming trend we had been experiencing, at least until the past 15 years or so.

"Changes in carbon-14 concentration in the Earth's atmosphere, which serves as a long term proxy of solar activity. Note the present day is on the left-hand side of this figure."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_activity

4 posted on 05/03/2012 7:46:18 AM PDT by ETL (ALL (most?) of the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

Good Hunting... from Varmint Al

5 posted on 05/03/2012 7:57:31 AM PDT by Varmint Al
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: All
More from the comments:

*************************************EXCERPT************************************

William Astley says:

May 2, 2012 at 7:40 pm

There are cycles of warming, followed by cooling and in some cases abrupt cooling in the paleoclimatic record that correlate with cosmogenic isotope changes. All of the observational data points to the sun as the fundamental driver of the cyclic climate changes, including the very large, very rapid, Younger Dryas (Heinrich events) climate change events, that are capable of terminating interglacial periods. The unanswered question is how the solar magnetic cycle changes cause what is observed.

It will be interesting to watch this cycle end. This does appear to be an interruption to the solar magnetic cycle, as opposed to a slow down in the cycle.

The extreme AGW supporters should have left themselves a way out.


6 posted on 05/03/2012 8:02:54 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (The Global Warming HOAX is about Global Governance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Image and video hosting by TinyPic

The Center for Sun-Climate Research at the DNSC (Danish National Space Center) investigates the connection between variations in the intensity of cosmic rays and climatic changes on Earth. This field of research has been given the name 'cosmoclimatology'"..."Cosmic ray intensities – and therefore cloudiness – keep changing because the Sun's magnetic field varies in its ability to repel cosmic rays coming from the Galaxy, before they can reach the Earth." :
http://www.spacecenter.dk/research/sun-climate
______________________________________________________

Here's an excellent book out on the subject titled "The Chilling Stars, 2nd Edition: A Cosmic View of Climate Change". It's written by one of the top scientists advancing the theory (Henrik Svensmark, of the above mentioned Danish National Space Center/DNSC).

"The authors explain their theory that sub-atomic particles from exploded stars have more effect on the climate than manmade CO2."
http://www.sciencedaily.com/books/t/1840468157-the_chilling_stars_the_new_theory_of_climate_change.htm

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

Amazon Books: "The Chilling Stars, 2nd Edition: A Cosmic View of Climate Change"
http://www.amazon.com/Chilling-Stars-2nd-Cosmic-Climate/dp/1840468661 zs90]

7 posted on 05/03/2012 8:08:30 AM PDT by ETL (ALL (most?) of the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ETL; Varmint Al
Thanks,...from Amazon:

****************************************EXCERPT*****************************************

Book Description

December 15, 2011
Global warming is a household phrase these days, and it has led to a situation in which far too many educated people believe that mankind is hastening the destruction of the world through industry and civilization. But where is the evidence to support these claims? In this impossible-to-put-down book Harold Ambler presents the history of climate in ways that are accessible to the average Joe or Jill and which make it clear that in terms of temperature, weather, and climate we have been here before. Without compromising on scientific detail, Ambler spends each chapter focusing on a different facet of climate science including sunspots, tradewinds, computer modeling, and data collection. He also deftly connects political stakeholders in the global warming arena to various distortions of the science. This distillation of information gives the reader the ability to decide whether global warming is a tangible threat or a convenient propaganda tool.

8 posted on 05/03/2012 8:10:42 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (The Global Warming HOAX is about Global Governance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

Ignore the implied link just above...goes back to the top of this thread.


9 posted on 05/03/2012 8:15:16 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (The Global Warming HOAX is about Global Governance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: All
Working link:

Don't Sell Your Coat: Surprising Truths About Climate Change

10 posted on 05/03/2012 8:17:51 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (The Global Warming HOAX is about Global Governance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

Are these predictions on a par with Hurricane predictions? Since a CME event which would be damaging would depend on its intensity and direction (pointed at the earth) when it occurs, it would seem less likely to occur, yet I have seen predictions we are “due” such an event. I lost everything in Charlie, which was a very small, but intense storm which was a direct hit for me. Aside from “Hype”, what is the general thoughts on CMEs?


11 posted on 05/03/2012 8:25:12 AM PDT by Gadsden1st
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

About a year or so ago, there were a few articles about the lack of evidence of solar cycle 25, which should be exhibiting itself at the poles, I believe. Any recent news on that?


12 posted on 05/03/2012 8:29:31 AM PDT by Jack of all Trades (Hold your face to the light, even though for the moment you do not see.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

Rather than peaking in 2013, I think we may be already at the peak.


13 posted on 05/03/2012 8:33:42 AM PDT by PapaBear3625 (In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. - George Orwell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ETL
The NY Times took exception to the cosmic ray causing clouds theory the other day....see this thread:

Clouds’ Effect on Climate Change Is Last Bastion for Dissenters

Actually they didn't think clouds matter so neither does the sun having any impact on cosmic rays causing clouds matter.

14 posted on 05/03/2012 8:33:54 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (The Global Warming HOAX is about Global Governance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: ETL
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2879047/posts ~ kind of an update on the author's research ~ he's got his tight correlations now and lab work to back it all up.

Gonna' get right chilly ya hear

15 posted on 05/03/2012 8:36:22 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Jack of all Trades

There was an article last month about the sun’s magnetic field splitting.....last time this occured was during the Maunder Minimum if I remember correctly.


16 posted on 05/03/2012 8:38:26 AM PDT by spokeshave (If Obama is Lenin....who are Trotsky and Stalin...?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: ETL
I love this chart;

17 posted on 05/03/2012 8:41:14 AM PDT by FreeAtlanta (Liberty and Justice for ALL)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: All
From the NY Times article see Link above.....

************************************EXCERPT***************************************

Some politicians have welcomed that message, regularly calling Dr. Lindzen and a handful of other contrarian scientists before Congressional committees. During a hearing before a House subcommittee, Representative Dana Rohrabacher, a California Republican and vocal global warming skeptic, complained that “in the scientific community, there are people trying to tell us that we have got to accept draconian changes in our way of life mandated by law because the CO2 that we are emitting is going to cause drastic consequences to the planet’s climate.”

He repeatedly sought affirmation from Dr. Lindzen for his views, and got it.

*******************************************************

Dana is my Congressman.....

18 posted on 05/03/2012 8:46:35 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (The Global Warming HOAX is about Global Governance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Jack of all Trades

I believe that a new sunspot cycle technically begins when the magnetic polarity of appearing sunspot pairs reverses. The ‘spots’ are the cross sections of twisted magnetic field lines which poke, or ‘loop’, out of the Sun’s surface. They are dark because they are comparatively cooler than the surrounding solar surface. Their main effect on Earth climate is an indirect one involving charged particles from deep space [galactic cosmic rays] and the sun’s ability to repel them. The sun’s ability various with its fluctuating magnetic cycle.


19 posted on 05/03/2012 8:48:32 AM PDT by ETL (ALL (most?) of the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: ETL
Here's the current magnetic field butterfly diagram from the same website referenced in the original above. Not sure what we can make of it except the poles have not yet reversed from cycle 22. The current conditions don't look very atypical to my untrained eye.
20 posted on 05/03/2012 8:54:45 AM PDT by Jack of all Trades (Hold your face to the light, even though for the moment you do not see.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: FreeAtlanta
Here is a better copy of the chart that combines the longer solar cycles, volcanic activity and historic events.

It is very powerful.

I wonder what will happen when we also have our own 25,000 year magnetic pole flip? Why does that happen? Most theories deal with currents in the earth and harmonics, but what if it is simpler? What if it has to do with the passing of some large cosmic object like a huge comet? What effect would that also have on our Sun? Just food for thought.

21 posted on 05/03/2012 8:55:24 AM PDT by FreeAtlanta (Liberty and Justice for ALL)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Gadsden1st
The predictions on the Sun's activities ,...I think ...are more reliable.

System there is not as chaotic as the system on earth.

Not that it is understood of course.

I am not a Solar or a Climate Scientist....but I have been heavily involved with installed Main Frames...

So I know that computer modeling on any computer is totally dependent on the skill and understanding of those building the software model.

All computers are just High Speed Idiots.

But they have magical qualities.

22 posted on 05/03/2012 8:57:30 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (The Global Warming HOAX is about Global Governance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Jack of all Trades

The sunspot polarity reversal has already occurred - a year or two ago


23 posted on 05/03/2012 9:00:07 AM PDT by ETL (ALL (most?) of the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: spokeshave

I’m a little concerned about changes in the Earth’s magnetic field (weakening, could be the advance sign of a polarity reversal). Does the Sun’s magnetism have a ‘harmonic’ effect upon the Earth?


24 posted on 05/03/2012 9:01:28 AM PDT by Max in Utah (A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Gadsden1st

Are you connecting a CME on the Sun with a Hurricane event on our Global Weather Cyclonic events?


25 posted on 05/03/2012 9:02:53 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (The Global Warming HOAX is about Global Governance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Jack of all Trades
"Horace W. Babcock proposed in 1961 a qualitative model for the dynamics of the solar outer layers:

* The start of [a new solar] cycle begins with a well-established dipole field component aligned along the solar rotational axis. The field lines tend to be held by the highly conductive solar plasma of the solar surface.

* The solar surface plasma rotation rate is different at different latitudes, and the rotation rate is 20 percent faster at the equator than at the poles (one rotation every 27 days). Consequently, the magnetic field lines are wrapped by 20 percent every 27 days.

* After many rotations, the field lines become highly twisted and bundled, increasing their intensity, and the resulting buoyancy lifts the bundle to the solar surface, forming a bipolar field that appears as two spots, being kinks in the field lines.

* The sunspots result from the strong local magnetic fields in the solar surface that exclude the light-emitting solar plasma and appear as darkened spots on the solar surface.

* The leading spot of the bipolar field has the same polarity as the solar hemisphere, and the trailing spot is of opposite polarity. The leading spot of the bipolar field tends to migrate towards the equator, while the trailing spot of opposite polarity migrates towards the solar pole of the respective hemisphere with a resultant reduction of the solar dipole moment. This process of sunspot formation and migration continues until the solar dipole field reverses (after about 11 years).

* The solar dipole field, through similar processes, reverses again at the end of the 22-year cycle.

* The magnetic field of the spot at the equator sometimes weakens, allowing an influx of coronal plasma that increases the internal pressure and forms a magnetic bubble which may burst and produce an ejection of coronal mass, leaving a coronal hole with open field lines. Such a coronal mass ejections are a source of the high-speed solar wind.

* The fluctuations in the bundled fields convert magnetic field energy into plasma heating, producing emission of electromagnetic radiation as intense ultraviolet (UV) and X-rays."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babcock_Model
_________________________________________________

"Different parts of the Sun rotate at different speeds. The Sun's equator spins fastest, and the poles spin more slowly. This causes the Sun's magnetic field to get all tangled up over time. Loops in the tangled magnetic field poke through the Sun's surface sometimes. When they do, they make sunspots."
Windows to the Universe original artwork.

http://www.windows.ucar.edu/tour/link=/sun/Solar_interior/Sun_layers/differential_rotation.html
_________________________________________________

From March of 2008...

"New solar cycles always begin with a high-latitude, reversed polarity sunspot. High latitude refers to the Sun's grid of latitude and longitude; old sunspots congregate near the Sun's equator and new sunspots appear higher, at around 25-30 degrees latitude. Reversed polarity means a sunspot with opposite magnetic polarity compared to sunspots from the previous solar cycle, such as the one detected on the 4 January this year. However, Solar Cycle 23 has not yet ended, and it may run concurrently with the new cycle for up to a year while sunspots from the old cycle become less numerous."

http://www.astronomynow.com/news/080304solarcycle/
_________________________________________________

"The physical basis of the solar cycle was elucidated in the early twentieth century by George Ellery Hale and collaborators, who in 1908 showed that sunspots were strongly magnetized (this was the first detection of magnetic fields outside the Earth), and in 1919 went on to show that the magnetic polarity of sunspot pairs:

* Is always the same in a given solar hemisphere throughout a given sunspot cycle;

* Is opposite across hemispheres throughout a cycle;

* Reverses itself in both hemispheres from one sunspot cycle to the next.

Hale's observations revealed that the solar cycle is a magnetic cycle with an average duration of 22 years. However, because very nearly all manifestations of the solar cycle are insensitive to magnetic polarity, it remains common usage to speak of the "11-year solar cycle". ..."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_cycle
_________________________________________________

26 posted on 05/03/2012 9:03:52 AM PDT by ETL (ALL (most?) of the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Jack of all Trades
From nasa.gov, January 10, 2008...

Solar Cycle 24 Begins

"On January 4, 2008, a reversed-polarity sunspot appeared—and this signals the start of Solar Cycle 24," says David Hathaway of the Marshall Space Flight Center.

Solar activity waxes and wanes in 11-year cycles. Lately, we've been experiencing the low ebb, "very few flares, sunspots, or activity of any kind," says Hathaway. "Solar minimum is upon us."

The previous solar cycle, Solar Cycle 23, peaked in 2000-2002 with many furious solar storms. That cycle decayed as usual to the present quiet leaving solar physicists little to do other than wonder, when would the next cycle begin?

The answer is now [Jan 4, 2008].

"New solar cycles always begin with a high-latitude, reversed polarity sunspot," explains Hathaway. "Reversed polarity" means a sunspot with opposite magnetic polarity compared to sunspots from the previous solar cycle. "High-latitude" refers to the sun's grid of latitude and longitude. Old cycle spots congregate near the sun's equator. New cycle spots appear higher, around 25 or 30 degrees latitude.

The sunspot that appeared on January 4th fits both these criteria. It was high latitude (30 degrees N) and magnetically reversed. NOAA named the spot AR10981, or "sunspot 981" for short.

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2008/10jan_solarcycle24.htm
_________________________________________________

Image and video hosting by TinyPic
N/S = North South magnetic polarity

27 posted on 05/03/2012 9:08:17 AM PDT by ETL (ALL (most?) of the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
NASA Hathaway prediction (updated today)
28 posted on 05/03/2012 9:13:28 AM PDT by PapaBear3625 (In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. - George Orwell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2879047/posts ~
kind of an update on the author's research ~ he's got his tight correlations now and lab work to back it all up.

Thanks. I haven't been following the research lately. I'll check it out when I have more time.

29 posted on 05/03/2012 9:15:11 AM PDT by ETL (ALL (most?) of the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: FreeAtlanta

Thanks. Looks like a good one. I’ll take a closer look when I’m able. Got to get ready for work.


30 posted on 05/03/2012 9:18:44 AM PDT by ETL (ALL (most?) of the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: ETL
Enjoy. Seems it's not the Sun ~ rather SUPER NOVAS ~ and then the Sun, then the other stuff, then destruction of the world ~ guy has correlated Earth Extinctions with Super Nova densities in our vicinity.

The Super Novas correlate well with cosmic ray density. The laboratory experiments (and observations of a coronal mass ejection) prove cosmic rays create conditions for production of sulfur compounds that serve as particles around which water droplets/ice can form to create clouds.

It's simpler than I thought it would be ~ not at all Rube Goldburgish ~ just happens all the time.

It's a universal machine, so anywhere in our galaxy, or any galaxy, where there are clouds of gas that can be crunched into potential super novas, the life on the worlds in the vicinity (which is an enormous vicinity BTW0) will be subjected repeatedly to biologically destructive levels of cosmic rays ~ which act through the climate (atmospherics) to do bad stuff to critters.

31 posted on 05/03/2012 9:25:42 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Gadsden1st; Jack of all Trades
From the comments.....and why I LOVE the WUWT website and read the comments:

********************************EXCERPT********************************************

Leif Svalgaard says:

May 2, 2012 at 5:10 pm

the predicted size makes this the smallest sunspot cycle in about 100 years
Was part of the title of our prediction paper: http://www.leif.org/research/Cycle%2024%20Smallest%20100%20years.pdf

*******************************snip***************************************

Leif Svalgaard says:

May 2, 2012 at 5:59 pm

LC Kirk, Perth says:
May 2, 2012 at 5:53 pm
If the monthly plots are smoothed International Sunspot Numbers, as for the predicted numbers, then the factor is ‘Daily Number’ x 0.65 = ‘Monthly Plotted Value’. Though I still don’t know if they are plotting the ISN number for the last day of the month, or an average value for the month.
It is much simpler than that. The International Sunspot Number for historical reasons [to be compatible with Rudolf Wolf's count for 1849 to 1865] is reported as 0.6 x the actual count, while the NOAA count is just the raw count [actually = 10 x number of groups + number of spots].

*******************************************snip****************************************

Leif Svalgaard says:

May 2, 2012 at 7:50 pm

vicepapr says:
May 2, 2012 at 7:03 pm
what does explain the match in sunspot number but mismatch in maximun date?
We were not predicting the date [our method does not support a date prediction] so were only using the ‘nomimal’ date eleven years after the previous maximum in 2000.

**********************************************snip**************************************

AND

***********************************

Robert in Perth (soon to be back in South Africa) says:

May 2, 2012 at 8:38 pm

Leif @5.10 am

You are being far too modest.

History will record that the seminal article on the length and strength of Solar Cycle 24 was published in Geophysical Research Letters on 11 January 2005 by Leif Svalgaard et al entitled SUNSPOT CYCLE 24: SMALLEST CYCLE IN 100 YEARS?

2005 was the hundredth anniversary of Einstein’s miracle year.

With what we are currently witnessing in 2012 with the trenchant behaviour of the Southern Polar Field on the Wilcox Solar Observatories website 7 years after the publication of your article, coupled with the brevity of the article itself, has convinced me that the Svalgaard et al article would no doubt have drawn the Great Man’s stamp approval as a fitting commemoration of his achievements.

1687, 1859 and 1905 mark the years of some of humanity’s greatest ever achievements.

Sadly, as the 2009 Climategate leaks (my absolute gratitude to the anonymous whistleblower forever) reveal we have now seen the depths of debasement that so-called scientists are prepared to stoop to.

My absolute gratitude goes out to Anthony and heroes like Leif, Bob Tisdale, Ryan Maue, Joe Bastardi, Robert Brown of recent vintage who share their insights and help to bring us to a proper understanding of our place in the universe.

Leif, the final death blow for the debasers and their claims of “settled science” should have come on 6 December 2011 at the Fall Meeting of the AGU, (who in fact published your article) with the Stevens Lecture on Clouds but the Anthropogenic Global Gravy Train with all its hangers on, has somehow managed to carry on.

Richard Black and his BBC monstrosities somehow never got round to covering Stevens’s lecture and its inescapable conclusion that current climate models are incapable of properly modelling for clouds!

Leif, it is one thing to arrive at a prediction that ultimately turns out to provide a the correct answer in PhD length dissertations that you need a PhD in solar physics to understand, but you arrived at the correct outcome that has been validated 7 years later in 4 pages of clear and easily understandable writing. .

It was Einstein who produced a theory of such complexity that he said that only 11 men alive understood it, who endorsed the policy of making things as simple as possible.

The factual evidence is now “in”, and the science is now “settled” as we are constantly being bombarded with and Lo and Behold, Svalgaard et al are proven right

FWIW I believe we are witnessing at least an analogue solar cycle similar to the one a century and a half ago that spawned the Carrington event with wild and unpredictable peaks and troughs in solar activity.

As I have reached exactly the opposite conclusion to the one espoused by you in the Forum section regarding the direct influence of the Sun’s Solar Cycles on the climate of the Earth on the Solarham.com website, (which tragically has gone missing in action in the past 2 days), I believe that a disastrous period of solar-induced global cooling and climate instability awaits mankind.

Now that is Climate change I can believe in!

Science is all about producing models and hypotheses that have predictive power.

Your model has been validated in an area of physics that is vitally important to mankind and the names of Svalgaard and Cliver and Kamide as potential candidates should be drawn to the attention of the judges who awarded the 1921 version of the prize to Albert Einstein.

Kind Regards.


32 posted on 05/03/2012 9:26:29 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (The Global Warming HOAX is about Global Governance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Max in Utah
I’m a little concerned about changes in the Earth’s magnetic field (weakening, could be the advance sign of a polarity reversal).

That is indeed what the experts think is happening (both)

The Earth's magnetic field helps shield us from potentially dangerous solar wind particles [basically same as galactic cosmic rays, only much less energetic/slower moving.

33 posted on 05/03/2012 9:27:22 AM PDT by ETL (ALL (most?) of the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]


Donate here!

FReepers who believe in and support our pro-life, pro-family, pro-limited government conservative causes, enjoy reading and participating on FR, think it’s a worthwhile endeavor and would like to help us keep it going.
Please click the link.
The Republic you save may be your own.



34 posted on 05/03/2012 9:28:38 AM PDT by RedMDer (https://support.woundedwarriorproject.org/default.aspx?tsid=93)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: ETL

Correct, I was just noting that the South pole is still at +10G, and the North Pole is still at -10G. I think I noticed this and thought it was odd at first, but looking back to previous cycles it’s really not.


35 posted on 05/03/2012 9:29:56 AM PDT by Jack of all Trades (Hold your face to the light, even though for the moment you do not see.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
Seems it's not the Sun ~ rather SUPER NOVAS

The theory is it's galactic cosmic rays emitted by distant super novas. The galactic cosmic rays help promote cloud formation and COOLING on Earth. The sun's magnetic field acts to repel GCRs, more or less depending on the current level of solar activity. More sunspots = less low-lying, thick cumulus, cooling-effect clouds = warmer temps

36 posted on 05/03/2012 9:36:32 AM PDT by ETL (ALL (most?) of the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: ETL

Thanks,,,,good stuff...haven’t seen that before.


37 posted on 05/03/2012 9:44:38 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (The Global Warming HOAX is about Global Governance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: ETL
The Sun's magnetic field goes through cycles ~ short duration compared to "density of Super Nova explosions" ~ those seem to be based on where in the arm you are, and how high above or below the plain of the ecliptic you might be ~ some places are, with some regularity, hotter and nastier than others.

Enough cosmic rays are produced to simply overwhelm the puny efforts of the Sun ~ and we end up with lots of ice and stuff ~ and fewer species!

Looking at the chart it appears we are heading into another band of Super Novas ~

This knowledge helps us understand where in this and other galaxies life can survive for long enough to come up with some good thoughts and neat inventions.

38 posted on 05/03/2012 9:50:41 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Max in Utah

The danger of focusing all human effort and funding on man made global warming and forcing out any alternative thinking is that we might really miss something that is predictable and deadly. Maybe, if we know far enough in advance, some of the wasted resources that are going into cow farts and car exhaust could be used to figure out how to protect mankind until things stabilize, or food storage for extremely cold weather. How about an inevitable meteor or commit hit? We could use some of the wasted man made global warming resources on actually making a system that could detect and divert “earth killer” objects.


39 posted on 05/03/2012 9:50:41 AM PDT by FreeAtlanta (Liberty and Justice for ALL)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: FreeAtlanta; ETL; Gadsden1st; Jack of all Trades; PapaBear3625
YES....and from the comments:

******************************************EXCERPT****************************************

Robert in Perth (soon to be back in South Africa) says:

May 2, 2012 at 10:08 pm

Doug @8.42

Maunder or Dalton or a Solar Cycle 14 strength sun, a small solar cycle is alarming.

The current state of the Sun and the refusal of the Southern polar field to budge is not a good sign at all.

The state of the Danube last year points to a slowing down of the hydrological cycle in an area of historically very reliable rainfall. Cold means less evaporation and less rain unless you have access to a sea that is anomalously warm somewhere near you.

Your assessment of where it is on the planet determines how you feel the effects of a weakening sun is exactly correct.

There are vast differences between the Northern & Southern Hemispheres.

The Oceanic Heat Content, or exactly how much heat is stored in the oceans and the rate at it is lost at, (Tropical Cyclones/Hurricanes/ Typhoons such as Yasi here in Australia and El Nino’s liberate an enormous amount of heat and transfer it elsewhere), and the ocean circulation patterns when the sun begins its weakening phase is very relevant.

The cost of a Canadian heating bill in an El Nino as opposed to a La Nina winter!

The current pattern of the Gulfstream, (poor pun intended), seems to be succumbing to a renewed Labrador current already.

There many other factors such as the position of Earth’s geomagnetic poles at the time, the level of volcanism, the stage of the Milankovich cycle.

However, the fact is that the Northern Latitudes have exhibited extreme non-anthropogenic climate change (ie Natural) in the recent past that worries me.

Tree rings in Texas demonstrate mega droughts more extreme than 2011 disaster by orders of magnitude, the Vikings grew barley in Greenland not that long ago and examining the stomach contents of frozen mammoths, shows just how quickly they succumbed to a sudden change in climate.

The Mammoths did not decompose which would have happened in the ordinary course of things if a warm period had intervened.

The ability to predict the size and strength of a Solar Cycle is vital and that is why Leif deserves the accolades due to him.

40 posted on 05/03/2012 10:22:41 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (The Global Warming HOAX is about Global Governance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: All
More from the comments:

*************************************EXCERPT*******************************************

Samurai says:

May 3, 2012 at 4:06 am

You almost have to feel sorry for the poor Warmunistas. Everything was going so well for them until: SC23 turned out to be so weak and now SC24 looks to be the lowest in 100 years.

To make matters worse, CERN was finally allowed to conduct the CLOUD experiment and it turns out GCRs do, in fact, nucleate inorganic compounds, which create increased cloud cover and cooler global temperatures.

I can’t wait for Svensmark peer-pending paper to come out, showing the evidence that +50 nanometer cloud seeds are possible in the Scensmark Effect.

Does anyone have any news approximately when Svensmark paper will be out? TIA.

41 posted on 05/03/2012 10:42:32 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (The Global Warming HOAX is about Global Governance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: All
MORE:

**************************************EXCERPT*******************************************

Allan MacRae says:

May 3, 2012 at 5:23 am

blogoriginator says: May 3, 2012 at 12:45 am

Can anybody tell me what kind of Global Temperature we’re facing in the next ten years?
____________________

History – 2002:

On 1 September 2002, I wrote in an article in the Calgary Herald:
” If solar activity is the main driver of surface temperature [as I believe it is] rather than CO2, we should begin the next cooling period by 2020 to 2030.”

This conclusion was based on decades of study, and a phone call to Dr. Tim Patterson, Carleton University Paleoclimatologist, who had studied natural warming and cooling cycles that he believed were related to the Gleissberg (Wolf) Cycle.

We were also aware of Hathaway’s now-failed prediction of SC24 peaking at Tmax ~160, and the prediction by NASA? that SC25 would be very weak.

At the time, I was (and still am) unsure if the warming and cooling cycle were better related to the PDO than the Gleissberg – If it is the PDO, global cooling could commence sooner, perhaps about now.
____________________

Update – 2012:

Recent information include the much-lower prediction of a Rmax of ~60 for SC24, and recent work, which I have scanned but not studied, on solar impacts on Earth’s climate.

Accordingly, I have little choice but to hold to my 2002 statement – the next natural global cooling period will commence by 2020-2030.

Caveat: It is possible we were “late” in this prediction, and that global cooling has already begun, but it is not yet serious or significant.

Will global cooling become serious and significant? I do not know, but I think this is a very real possibility – there is a significant probability of serious global cooling commencing by 2020-2030, or sooner.
____________________

Implications of Serious Global Cooling:

Serious global cooling could significantly decrease the global grain harvest, which would have major impacts on humanity and the environment.

If this occurs, based on current political realities, humanity will be woefully unprepared. It would, in my opinion, be sensible to start now making cost-effective preparations for this possibility.
These measures would include ensuring that stockpiles of grain are adequate, and accelerating the further development of frost-resistant crops.

Is this an alarmist position? Another misguided application of the “Precautionary Principle”? I suggest not – first, the net costs of my modest proposal are not that great, especially when one considers the huge amount of American corn that is currently being squandered in corn ethanol production. My proposal costs much less than the very costly, inefficient and self-serving “green energy” schemes of the global warming movement, Furthermore, I have no financial interest in promoting climate alarmism, and a sincere interest in reducing the needless suffering of humanity and the resulting destruction of the environment.


42 posted on 05/03/2012 10:52:50 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (The Global Warming HOAX is about Global Governance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: All
More:

*********************************EXCERPT*****************************************

Gerard says:

May 3, 2012 at 5:40 am

I still find the predictions of De Jager most accurate and in contrast to Svalgaard he does see an important role for solar fluctuations in the earth’s climate. The recent warming period until 1999 is in his view not unusual given the variations in solar forcing through the last centuries.

De Jager, Duhau, Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestial Physics (2008):

“We find that the system is presently undergoing a transition from the recent Grand Maximum to another regime. This transition started in 2000 and it is expected to end around the maximum of cycle 24 foreseen for 2014, with a maximum sunspot number Rmax= 68+/-17. At that time a period of lower solar activity will start. That period will be one of regular oscillations, as occurred between 1730 and 1923. The first of these oscillations may even turn out to be as strongly negative as around 1810, in which case a short Grand Minimum similar to the Dalton one might develop. This moderate-to-low-activity episode is expected to last for at least one Gleissberg cycle (60-100 years).”

De Jager adapted this expectation in 2010 based on new observations and better interpretations to an Rmax of 55. Also the Grand Minimum is expected to be deeper and Maunder like.

43 posted on 05/03/2012 11:02:08 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (The Global Warming HOAX is about Global Governance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: All
Got to get this one in:

**********************************EXCERPT************************************

Allan MacRae says:

May 3, 2012 at 11:08 am

MarkW says: May 3, 2012 at 9:40 am
Allan says: “Serious global cooling could significantly decrease the global grain harvest, which would have major impacts on humanity and the environment.”

Mark says: “There’s plenty of spare (agricultural) capacity should global temperatures turn down.”

OK Mark, let me try to better quantify the question:

1. IF Earth returns to the colder global temperatures of the Maunder Minimum circa 1700, what will be the impact on the global grain harvest?
How long would it take for agriculture to adapt and what grain stores would be required to mitigate shortfalls prior to such adaptation?
What other impacts would matter – e.g. energy supply?
Are we currently capable of managing the impacts of this natural global cooling, or not?

2. Same question for the Dalton Minimum circa 1800.

Does anyone know if this question has been posed and adequately answered amidst all the billions of dollars that have been spent on global warming (aka “climate change”) research?

Because, based on the evidence to date, the catastrophic humanmade global warming crisis does not exist, and natural global cooling, whether moderate or severe, is increasingly probable.

__________

Here is something I just found that I want to remember:
http://ktwop.wordpress.com/2012/03/10/solar-cycles-and-the-landscheidt-minimum/


44 posted on 05/03/2012 11:28:27 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (The Global Warming HOAX is about Global Governance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

Hopefully the global temperature decline shall not go much lower then as projected.


45 posted on 05/03/2012 12:58:07 PM PDT by Marine_Uncle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

BTTT!


46 posted on 05/04/2012 7:58:42 PM PDT by neverdem (Xin loi minh oi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach; 75thOVI; agrace; aimhigh; Alice in Wonderland; AndrewC; aragorn; ...

Thanks Ernest.




47 posted on 05/05/2012 8:53:59 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (FReepathon 2Q time -- https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson