.JPG)
This image of the sun shows no sunspots continuing to be the case
Posted on 08/21/2009 6:31:03 PM PDT by neverdem
This image of the sun shows no sunspots continuing to be the case
The sun seems to be back to its slumbering ways as we head towards the fall 2009.
During the spring and summer months, sunspot activity, one measure of the sun’s energy output (another is the 10.7cm radio flux), was quite active. In July, the strongest flare in two years erupted from a spot that was rotating across the face of the sun. July was the third month in a row with heightened activity; this suggested a trend which would at last fall in line with projections for solar change.
However, solar physics is still a science very much on the frontier of discovery. I have read some blogs where contributors to “Web” thoughts are quite harsh and quick to weigh in that these missed forecasts show that scientists haven’t a clue about what the sun is doing.
Such viewpoints illustrate poor understanding of what science is all about. It’s a discovery process. Meteorologists don’t always get the forecast right (which is frustrating to me and all weather scientists) but it doesn’t mean our projections have no value at all. Astronomers have had to “change their story” over the centuries as better detection methods became available, etc. Furthermore, natural processes stump the most learned experts at times: earthquakes, volcanoes, tornadoes, and so forth.
Now, let’s lay aside the hits and misses of the science community and focus on what the sun is doing now. Since mid-July our friendly neighborhood star has gone blank again. It’s the longest blank streak in a year. This means a continuation of the deepest solar minimum in a hundred years: at least for now. The longest number of consecutive blank days during the present cycle 23/24 minimum was 52 during the summer of 2008. The most recent count was 41 as of August 20th.
If 2009 logs 64% blank days during the remainder of the year, it will better 2008. Given that the ratio YTD is 4/5 (or about 80%) through August 20, it’s quite possible 2009 will displace 2008 as the quietest year since 1913.
None of this is to say we’re entering some kind of “Dalton Minimum” or worse yet a “Maunder Minimum”. If this were to occur, then it’s possible a more significant and prolonged global cooling could occur. However the data supporting such a conclusion, although somewhat correlated to previous temperature dips, is not an iron clad case. Just as global warming as presented today is not.
If global warming were so over-riding of any natural process, (the warming of 1980-2000 is offered up as “proof”), please tell me why the trend has gone neutral to slightly cooler over the past few years. One would expect a continued upward trend given more and more carbon dioxide and methane in the air every year. Perhaps the sun and more likely oceanic cycles have a lot to do with this variation. If these fluctuations out of our control can make such a difference (as the 1997-1998 El Nino did with worldwide warming) in the global temperature distribution then who’s to say that the late 20th Century surge in heat is just another significant but natural anomaly like the sun’s present sleepiness, or record cold during the past few winters in Canada and the Great Lakes?
The model projections of a few years ago have completely missed the boat regarding 2009 conditions. Human–induced global warming (climate change) advocates will quickly retort that the models weren’t as accurate back then. Fair enough; but we’re still not seeing the response one would expect of a consistent upward trend in temperatures with more recent numbers. Now some are claiming that warming has taken a break until 2015, after which it will resume. Excuse me? This is the crux of my point; the story keeps changing but the problem is the data doesn’t match up. Just as with the sun, this points to an incomplete knowledge.
If the human influence is easily overshadowed (by cooling) during years when the LaNina is only moderate and arctic ice is less than 30 years ago, it begs the question what’s really going on.
Perhaps mankind is contributing to global climate change; if so, which is certainly possible, the signal may be much less than the projections alarmists put forth. The climate change could be due to urbanization, desertification and deforestation, which are all serious global issues we should aggressively combat.
As for arctic ice, unusual weather patterns and ocean currents play a role; even the NSIDC stated on August 4, 2009 that unseasonably strong southerly wind currents were primarily to blame for rapid July ice melt. This is something one would expect within a range of values over time. Please remember the arctic sea ice database is only 30 years old (it comes from satellites beginning in 1979) so the record minimum of 2007 means it’s the lowest in 30 years, which isn’t so remarkable.
Finally, this author is neither a “global warming denier” nor a “global cooling denier”. The fact that a lot of other scientists trumpet global warming/cooling (many more in the warm camp of course) doom doesn’t satisfy me that either assertion is true.
Consistent data would.
See post #20 about the colder weather for the next decade because of a Dalton Minimum...
Also, if you haven’t yet, take the time to see the documentary in post #5... :-)
I don’t have time tonight to watch it but I have saved it to my favorites for later viewing.
Top end scientist understand that, but dragging the herd into more complexity then they want to deal with, is very difficult. I once tried to do that in another field. Was very painful. Finally gave up. 5 years later they finally accepted the additional complexity.
I’m just guessing that muawiyah has been looking at the cyclic temperature pattern of the last 5 million years or more, and then comparing that to our present, very unusual interglacial period. We don’t have, you know, sunspot records going back 5 million years, though we do have some other partial data in some areas, over that period.
At any rate, our present interglacial period is not following the pattern: Temps have NOT peaked as high as the last few interglacials, and even more interestingly, instead of peaking and falling back off rapidly, as is virtually always the case, so far as we know, temperatures sort of maxed out (just barely below where they’ve been the last couple decades) and then just sort of levelled off. (The climate variations of the Dalton and Maunder Minimums are almost insignificant compared to the greater cyclic variations.) So, what I look at, and maybe muawiyah too(?) is the fact that we are overdue for a drop into a period of glaciation (normal climate, actually) that will make the Little Ice Age look like a moment of warm spring breeze, by comparison.
Looking at the longer term pattern, one might conclude that this present “flat” period is so unusual, that there almost has to be something going on that wasn’t happening in past cycles. Could it be Man? I don’t know of anyone who can really disprove the notion.
But, if Man is having an effect, how long will his puny activities counter the massive normal cycle? Given that even minor variations like the sunspot activity we are discussing here seem to be able to override any trend Man might cause, this is a most interesting, and potentially deadly, question. If nothing else, carbon based fuels WILL run out soon (on a geologic time scale), and then what?
Either way (Man does or does not have a significant effect), looking at the long term patterns, one can only come to one conclusion: Without interference by Man on a much greater scale than anyone has been debating in this thread, in the relatively near future, Chicago WILL be back to “normal”: Under a mile of ice.
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ice_Age_Temperature.png
Thanks for the post. Bump for later viewing.
Dat pretty cold!
Consensus Thaws On Global Warming
Another Global Warming Movie Flop
Meet The Man Who Has Exposed The Great Climate Change Con Trick
Study: Global warming bill could cost 2.4 million jobs, $1,250 per household
Study: Global warming bill could cost 2.4 million jobs, $1,250 per household
Senator Kerry Misfires about Global Warming and National Security
VIDEO: Clinton: US Has Made Mistake By Contributing Significantly To Global Warming (MUST SEE)
“If the human influence is easily overshadowed (by cooling) during years when the LaNina is only moderate and arctic ice is less than 30 years ago, it begs the question what’s really going on.”
Since most of Earth’s land mass is above the equator, so is most of the land-based temperature stations. And, there has long been questions about the location of those stations in the developed nations in the northern hemisphere, particularly as relates to proximity to the urban heat sinks. Similarly, in less developed nations, north or south, there has long been questions of the accuracy of record keeping. Someday some actual scientists may determine that the whole scam has been a version of GIGO (garbage in garbage out) that, if recognized, even the flawed ICCP modeling programs could not hide.
Quite correct. Charged particles from sunspots are a large component of the solar wind. No sunspots, decreased wind. Much more cosmic radiation reaching earth. This was demonstrated in a cloud chamber by researchers where clouds were formed by cosmic radiation.
Thanks for the ping!
Also, during the Medieval Warm Period, it was warm enough that grapes were grown in England and they produced wine. Much too cold for that now, demonstating that the Chicken Littles are wrong about this being the warmest period ever.
 |
||
| · join · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post new topic · | ||
I’m waiting for the third edition of The Chilling Stars when physicist Henrik Svensmark finishes the CLOUD09 experiments at CERN in Europe.
Did you get your interest in cosmic rays forming low lying clouds on Earth from his work?
He talks about how there are more cosmic rays entering Earth’s atmosphere when the sun’s magnetic field strength is lower and/or when we are in those parts of our galactic orbit where there are more cosmic rays.
You asked another FReeper — Did you get your interest in cosmic rays forming low lying clouds on Earth from his work?
—
Well, just to let other FReepers know... no one has to get people (your friends, neighbors, relatives, and coworkers) to read any scientist’s work and papers and published materials and books and so on (it would be nice, but people won’t do it).... :-)
All you have to do is get them to see “The Great Global Warming Swindle” in Post #5...
That’s it...
[... after that, each person can decided whether to take it further in their own research or not. At least, they will *know the story* after viewing “The Great Global Warming Swindle”...]
You said — I’m just guessing that muawiyah has been looking at the cyclic temperature pattern of the last 5 million years or more, and then comparing that to our present, very unusual interglacial period. We don’t have, you know, sunspot records going back 5 million years, though we do have some other partial data in some areas, over that period.
—
Well, I’ll depart from any “crowd” here, that may say that we have *anything* from 5 million years ago. The earth has not been around for 5 million years, but much, much less.
And besides that, we have enough direct and measurable and verifiable science right now (in the present day and with recent measurements) to tell us what we need to know about this so-called (and false) theory of “Anthropogenic Global Warming”...
Hey bro...how long do you think our rock near mars and venus has been floating around?
An article by an Oregon FReeper... which was mentioned on Rush...
Carbon Dioxide irrelevant in climate debate says MIT Scientist
by Dianna Cotter
August 18, 7:39 AM
In a study sure to ruffle the feathers of the Global Warming cabal, Professor Richard Lindzen of MIT has published a paper which proves that IPCC models are overstating by 6 times, the relevance of CO2 in Earth’s Atmosphere. Dr. Lindzen has found that heat is radiated out in to space at a far higher rate than any modeling system to date can account for.
Editorial: The science is in. the scare is out. Recent papers and data give a complete picture of why the UN is wrong. [ http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/originals/co2_report_july_09.pdf ]
The pdf file located at the link above from the Science and Public Policy Institute has absolutely, convincingly, and irrefutably proven the theory of Anthropogenic Global Warming to be completely false.
Professor Richard Lindzen of MIT’s peer reviewed work states “we now know that the effect of CO2 on temperature is small, we know why it is small, and we know that it is having very little effect on the climate.”
—
The global surface temperature record, which we update and publish
every month, has shown no statistically-significant “global warming”
for almost 15 years. Statistically-significant global cooling has now
persisted for very nearly eight years. Even a strong el Nino – expected
in the coming months – will be unlikely to reverse the cooling trend.
More significantly, the ARGO bathythermographs deployed
throughout the world’s oceans since 2003 show that the top 400
fathoms of the oceans, where it is agreed between all parties that at
least 80% of all heat caused by manmade “global warming” must
accumulate, have been cooling over the past six years. That now prolonged
ocean cooling is fatal to the “official” theory that “global
warming” will happen on anything other than a minute scale.
- SPPI Monthly CO2 Report: July 2009
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/originals/co2_report_july_09.pdf
—
If for no other reason than this: the IPCC assumes that the concentration of CO2 in 2100 will be 836 ppmv (parts per million volume). However, current graphs based on real data show that CO2 concentrations will only be 570 ppmv in 2100, cutting the IPCC’s estimates in half right there.
Another nail in the coffin of Global Warming is the observed rate of temperature change from 1980, which is observed to be 1.5 degrees C per century. The IPCC modeling calls for a range of 2.4 to 5.3 degree increase per century, which is far above what is observed in real data collected between 1980 and 2009. The graph below clearly represents a far different reality as opposed to the predictions.
Anyway, something from one of our own FReepers here... and as I said, mentioned and featured on Rush...
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.
