uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more x
View Poll Results: What impact will the sun's deep minima have on the future climate?
Climate getting progressively cooler through next solar cycles 280 43.28%
No impact 141 21.79%
Global warming is here to stay 122 18.86%
Calm before the solar storm of 2012-2013 104 16.07%
Voters: 647. You may not vote on this poll

Post Reply  
Thread Tools Search this Thread
26-08-2009, 17:15   #76
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,674
Another great read here

Global thermometers stopped rising after 1998, and have plummeted in the last two years by more than 0.5 degrees Celsius. The 2007-2008 temperature drop was not predicted by global climate models. But it was predictable by a decline in sunspot activity since 2000.

Spotless Days
Current Stretch: 46 days
2009 total: 188 days (79%)
Since 2004: 699 days
Typical Solar Min: 485 days
Redsunset is offline  
Thanks from:
26-08-2009, 17:28   #77
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,674
Global temps since 1988 chart

All four major global temperature tracking outlets (Hadley, NASA's GISS, UAH, RSS) have released updated data. All show that over the past year, global temperatures have dropped precipitously.

According to Robert Toggweiler of the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory at Princeton University and Joellen Russell, assistant professor of biogeochemical dynamics at the University of Arizona -- two prominent climate modellers -- the computer models that show polar ice-melt cooling the oceans, stopping the circulation of warm equatorial water to northern latitudes and triggering another Ice Age (a la the movie The Day After Tomorrow) are all wrong.

"We missed what was right in front of our eyes," says Prof. Russell. It's not ice melt but rather wind circulation that drives ocean currents northward from the tropics. Climate models until now have not properly accounted for the wind's effects on ocean circulation, so researchers have compensated by over-emphasizing the role of manmade warming on polar ice melt.

But when Profs. Toggweiler and Russell rejigged their model to include the 40-year cycle of winds away from the equator (then back towards it again), the role of ocean currents bringing warm southern waters to the north was obvious in the current Arctic warming.

Last month, Oleg Sorokhtin, a fellow of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences, shrugged off manmade climate change as "a drop in the bucket." Showing that solar activity has entered an inactive phase, Prof. Sorokhtin advised people to "stock up on fur coats."

He is not alone. Kenneth Tapping of our own National Research Council, who oversees a giant radio telescope focused on the sun, is convinced we are in for a long period of severely cold weather if sunspot activity does not pick up soon.

The last time the sun was this inactive, Earth suffered the Little Ice Age that lasted about five centuries and ended in 1850. Crops failed through killer frosts and drought. Famine, plague and war were widespread. Harbours froze, so did rivers, and trade ceased.

It's way too early to claim the same is about to happen again, but then it's way too early for the hysteria of the global warmers, too.
Redsunset is offline  
Thanks from:
26-08-2009, 18:02   #78
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,674

Just couldn't resist putting up this pic of an ORANGE our SUN

I've just noticed that this pic of our prime weather driver updates daily so will be handy to see any new acne appear.

Last edited by Redsunset; 27-08-2009 at 00:44. Reason: pic updates everyday
Redsunset is offline  
Thanks from:
26-08-2009, 18:07   #79
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,185
That picture says it all

Last edited by Kippure; 26-08-2009 at 18:16.
Kippure is offline  
26-08-2009, 22:35   #80
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 269
LOL, I love that picture!
Elmo5 is offline  
29-08-2009, 00:21   #81
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,674
Spotless Days
Current Stretch: 48 days
2009 total: 190 days (79%)
Since 2004: 701 days
Typical Solar Min: 485 days

BLANK SUN: Inspect the image below. It is a photo of the sun taken by the Solar and Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO). Can you guess what day it was taken?
August 28th, today. But it could have been taken on any day of the past seven weeks. For all that time, the face of the sun has looked exactly the same--utterly blank.

According to NOAA sunspot counts, the longest string of blank suns during the current solar minimum was 52 days back in July, Aug. and Sept. of 2008. If the current trend continues for only four more days, the record will shift to 2009. It's likely to happen; the sun remains eerily quiet and there are no sunspots in the offing.
Solar minimum is shaping up to be a big event indeed.
Redsunset is offline  
Thanks from:
30-08-2009, 05:15   #82
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 25
Spaceweather is hyping up another prominence.Could it be the spot that stops the record,or just wishful thinking.
QuasarK19 is offline  
02-09-2009, 15:50   #83
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 25
Hey buddy,howve you been.Looks like that spot ruined the streak.

Wonder if had something to do with it.
QuasarK19 is offline  
04-09-2009, 12:05   #84
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,674
September 3, 2009: The sun is in the pits of the deepest solar minimum in nearly a century. Weeks and sometimes whole months go by without even a single tiny sunspot. The quiet has dragged out for more than two years, prompting some observers to wonder, are sunspots disappearing?

"Personally, I'm betting that sunspots are coming back," says researcher Matt Penn of the National Solar Observatory (NSO) in Tucson, Arizona. But, he allows, "there is some evidence that they won't."

Penn's colleague Bill Livingston of the NSO has been measuring the magnetic fields of sunspots for the past 17 years, and he has found a remarkable trend. Sunspot magnetism is on the decline:

Above: Sunspot magnetic fields measured by Livingston and Penn from 1992 - Feb. 2009 using an infrared Zeeman splitting technique. [more]
"Sunspot magnetic fields are dropping by about 50 gauss per year," says Penn. "If we extrapolate this trend into the future, sunspots could completely vanish around the year 2015."

This disappearing act is possible because sunspots are made of magnetism. The "firmament" of a sunspot is not matter but rather a strong magnetic field that appears dark because it blocks the upflow of heat from the sun's interior. If Earth lost its magnetic field, the solid planet would remain intact, but if a sunspot loses its magnetism, it ceases to exist.

"According to our measurements, sunspots seem to form only if the magnetic field is stronger than about 1500 gauss," says Livingston. "If the current trend continues, we'll hit that threshold in the near future, and solar magnetic fields would become too weak to form sunspots."

"This work has caused a sensation in the field of solar physics," comments NASA sunspot expert David Hathaway, who is not directly involved in the research. "It's controversial stuff."
The controversy is not about the data. "We know Livingston and Penn are excellent observers," says Hathaway. "The trend that they have discovered appears to be real." The part colleagues have trouble believing is the extrapolation. Hathaway notes that most of their data were taken after the maximum of Solar Cycle 23 (2000-2002) when sunspot activity naturally began to decline. "The drop in magnetic fields could be a normal aspect of the solar cycle and not a sign that sunspots are permanently vanishing."

Penn himself wonders about these points. "Our technique is relatively new and the data stretches back in time only 17 years. We could be observing a temporary downturn that will reverse itself."

The technique they're using was pioneered by Livingston at the McMath-Pierce solar telescope near Tucson. He looks at a spectral line emitted by iron atoms in the sun's atmosphere. Sunspot magnetic fields cause the line to split in two—an effect called "Zeeman splitting" after Dutch physicist Pieter Zeeman who discovered the phenomenon in the 19th century. The size of the split reveals the intensity of the magnetism.

Astronomers have been measuring sunspot magnetic fields in this general way for nearly a century, but Livingston added a twist. While most researchers measure the splitting of spectral lines in the visible part of the sun's spectrum, Livingston decided to try an infra-red spectral line. Infrared lines are much more sensitive to the Zeeman effect and provide more accurate answers. Also, he dedicated himself to measuring a large number of sunspots—more than 900 between 1998 and 2005 alone. The combination of accuracy and numbers revealed the downturn.

If sunspots do go away, it wouldn't be the first time. In the 17th century, the sun plunged into a 70-year period of spotlessness known as the Maunder Minimum that still baffles scientists. The sunspot drought began in 1645 and lasted until 1715; during that time, some of the best astronomers in history (e.g., Cassini) monitored the sun and failed to count more than a few dozen sunspots per year, compared to the usual thousands.

"Whether [the current downturn] is an omen of long-term sunspot decline, analogous to the Maunder Minimum, remains to be seen," Livingston and Penn caution in a recent issue of EOS. "Other indications of solar activity suggest that sunspots must return in earnest within the next year."
Whatever happens, notes Hathaway, "the sun is behaving in an interesting way and I believe we're about to learn something new."
Attached Images
File Type: jpg gauss chart.JPG (32.0 KB, 31 views)

Last edited by Redsunset; 04-09-2009 at 12:08.
Redsunset is offline  
Thanks from:
04-09-2009, 14:02   #85
Registered User
blindjustice's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,131

the sunspot number during 1861-1989 shows a remarkable parallelism with the simultaneous variation in northern hemisphere mean temperatures (2). There is an even better correlation with the length of the solar cycle, between years of the highest numbers of sunspots. For example, the temperature anomaly was - 0.4 K in 1890 when the cycle was 11.7 years, but + 0.25 K in 1989 when the cycle was 9.8 years. Some critics of the theory of man-induced global warming have seized on this discovery to criticize the greenhouse gas theory.
Willson indicates that if the current rate of increase of solar irradiance continues until the mid 21th century, then the surface temperatures will increase by about 0.5� C. This is small, but not a negligible fraction of the expected greenhouse warming.

The relationship between cycle length and Earth temperatures is not well understood. Lower-than normal temperatures tend to occur in years when the sunspot cycle is longest, as confirmed by records of the annual duration of sea-ice around Iceland. The cycle will be longest again in the early 2020's.
The sun is the dimmest and quietest it has been for a century.

Scientists say images from its surface show a marked decline in events such as sunspots and solar flares, but they say it will not be enough to prevent global warming.

Astronomers hope new images of the Sun will offer an insight into why there is so little activity on our closest star.
The BBC's Pallab Ghosh compares images of the Sun from 2001 and earlier this year to show how activity has fallen.
blindjustice is offline  
(2) thanks from:
08-09-2009, 20:55   #86
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,674
No Sunspots Throw Climate Models Into Disarray

Modern climate models make many erroneous assumptions. Bad assumptions lead to errors in inference, when examining model output. One of the most significant data crimes of modern climate modelers is in ignoring the variability of Sol, our variable star.Fortunately, real scientists (not mere modelers) are beginning to examine the very real climate effects that arise from the solar energy flux when going from solar maximum to solar minimum.
A new study in the journal Science by a team of international of researchers led by the National Center for Atmospheric Research have found that the sunspot cycle has a big effect on the earth's weather. The puzzle has been how fluctuations in the sun's energy of about 0.1 percent over the course of the 11-year sunspot cycle could affect the weather? The press release describing the new study explains:

The team first confirmed a theory that the slight increase in solar energy during the peak production of sunspots is absorbed by stratospheric ozone. The energy warms the air in the stratosphere over the tropics, where sunlight is most intense, while also stimulating the production of additional ozone there that absorbs even more solar energy. Since the stratosphere warms unevenly, with the most pronounced warming occurring at lower latitudes, stratospheric winds are altered and, through a chain of interconnected processes, end up strengthening tropical precipitation.

At the same time, the increased sunlight at solar maximum causes a slight warming of ocean surface waters across the subtropical Pacific, where Sun-blocking clouds are normally scarce. That small amount of extra heat leads to more evaporation, producing additional water vapor. In turn, the moisture is carried by trade winds to the normally rainy areas of the western tropical Pacific, fueling heavier rains and reinforcing the effects of the stratospheric mechanism.

The top-down influence of the stratosphere and the bottom-up influence of the ocean work together to intensify this loop and strengthen the trade winds. As more sunshine hits drier areas, these changes reinforce each other, leading to less clouds in the subtropics, allowing even more sunlight to reach the surface, and producing a positive feedback loop that further magnifies the climate response.

These stratospheric and ocean responses during solar maximum keep the equatorial eastern Pacific even cooler and drier than usual, producing conditions similar to a La Nina event. However, the cooling of about 1-2 degrees Fahrenheit is focused farther east than in a typical La Nina, is only about half as strong, and is associated with different wind patterns in the stratosphere.
We are currently experiencing a rather unusual transition from solar cycle 23 to cycle 24. Sunspots have been very slow in appearing, and solar scientists are at a loss to explain why all of their predictions for the current cycle transition have failed.
...something is unusual about the current sunspot cycle. The current solar minimum has been unusually long, and with more than 670 days without sunspots through June 2009, the number of spotless days has not been equaled since 1933 (see http:// users . telenet .be/ j . janssens/ Spotless/ Spotless .html). The solar wind is reported to be in a uniquely low energy state since space measurements began nearly 40 years ago [Fisk and Zhao, 2009].

Why is a lack of sunspot activity interesting? During the period from 1645 to 1715, the Sun entered a period of low activity now known as the Maunder Minimum, when through several 11- year periods the Sun displayed few if any sunspots. Models of the Sun’s irradiance suggest that the solar energy input to the Earth decreased during that time and that this change in solar activity could explain the low temperatures recorded in Europe during the Little Ice Age [Lean et al., 1992]. _Eos_PDF_via_Reason
Real scientists are teaching the climate modelers a lesson: models are not the climate. Climate models are merely hypotheses in mathematics and computer code. They have to be thoroughly tested by scientific observations, before society is massively disrupted to suit the models.

Small fluctuations in solar activity, large influence on the climate

Sun spot frequency has an unexpectedly strong influence on cloud formation and precipitation

Our sun does not radiate evenly. The best known example of radiation fluctuations is the famous 11-year cycle of sun spots. Nobody denies its influence on the natural climate variability, but climate models have, to-date, not been able to satisfactorily reconstruct its impact on climate activity.

Researchers from the USA and from Germany have now, for the first time, successfully simulated, in detail, the complex interaction between solar radiation, atmosphere, and the ocean. As the scientific journal Science reports in its latest issue, Gerald Meehl of the US-National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) and his team have been able to calculate how the extremely small variations in radiation brings about a comparatively significant change in the System “Atmosphere-Ocean”.

Katja Matthes of the GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences, and co-author of the study, states: „Taking into consideration the complete radiation spectrum of the sun, the radiation intensity within one sun spot cycle varies by just 0.1 per cent. Complex interplay mechanisms in the stratosphere and the troposphere, however, create measurable changes in the water temperature of the Pacific and in precipitation”.

Top Down – Bottom up

In order for such reinforcement to take place many small wheels have to interdigitate. The initial process runs from the top downwards: increased solar radiation leads to more ozone and higher temperatures in the stratosphere. “The ultraviolet radiation share varies much more strongly than the other shares in the spectrum, i.e. by five to eight per cent, and that forms more ozone” explains Katja Matthes. As a result, especially the tropical stratosphere becomes warmer, which in turn leads to changed atmospheric circulation. Thus, the interrelated typical precipitation patterns in the tropics are also displaced.

The second process takes place in the opposite way: the higher solar activity leads to more evaporation in the cloud free areas. With the trade winds the increased amounts of moisture are transported to the equator, where they lead to stronger precipitation, lower water temperatures in the East Pacific and reduced cloud formation, which in turn allows for increased evaporation. Katja Matthes: “It is this positive back coupling that strengthens the process”. With this it is possible to explain the respective measurements and observations on the Earth’s surface.

Professor Reinhard Huettl, Chairman of the Scientific Executive Board of the GFZ (Helmholtz Association of German Research Centres) adds: “The study is important for comprehending the natural climatic variability, which – on different time scales – is significantly influenced by the sun. In order to better understand the anthropogenically induced climate change and to make more reliable future climate scenarios, it is very important to understand the underlying natural climatic variability.

This investigation shows again that we still have substantial research needs to understand the climate system”. Together with the Alfred Wegener-Institute for Polar and Marine Research and the Senckenberg Research Institute and Natural History Museum the GFZ is, therefore, organising a conference “Climate in the System Earth” scheduled for 2./3. November 2009 in Berlin.

[NOTE: there is evidence of solar impact on the surface temperature record, as Basil Copeland and I discovered in this report published here on WUWT titled Evidence of a Lunisolar Influence on Decadal and Bidecadal Oscillations In Globally Averaged Temperature Trends - Anthony]

Past studies have shown that sunspot numbers correspond to warming or cooling trends. The twentieth century has featured heightened activity, indicating a warming trend. (Source: Wikimedia Commons)

Solar activity has shown a major spike in the twentieth century, corresponding to global warming. This cyclic variation was acknowledged by a recent NASA study, which reviewed a great deal of past climate data. (Source: Wikimedia Commons)

Solar activity has shown a major spike in the twentieth century, corresponding to global warming. This cyclic variation was acknowledged by a recent NASA study, which reviewed a great deal of past climate data. (Source: Wikimedia Commons)
Now, a new research report from a surprising source may help to lay this skepticism to rest. A study from NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland looking at climate data over the past century has concluded that solar variation has made a significant impact on the Earth’s climate. The report concludes that evidence for climate changes based on solar radiation can be traced back as far as the Industrial Revolution.
Past research has shown that the sun goes through eleven year cycles. At the cycle’s peak, solar activity occurring near sunspots is particularly intense, basking the Earth in solar heat. According to Robert Cahalan, a climatologist at the Goddard Space Flight Center,
“Right now, we are in between major ice ages, in a period that has been called the Holocene.”
Thomas Woods, solar scientist at the University of Colorado in Boulder concludes,
“The fluctuations in the solar cycle impacts Earth’s global temperature by about 0.1 degree Celsius, slightly hotter during solar maximum and cooler during solar minimum. The sun is currently at its minimum, and the next solar maximum is expected in 2012.”
According to the study, during periods of solar quiet, 1,361 watts per square meter of solar energy reaches Earth’s outermost atmosphere. Periods of more intense activity brought 1.3 watts per square meter (0.1 percent) more energy.
Redsunset is offline  
Thanks from:
09-09-2009, 12:56   #87
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,674
we've hit the 200 spotless days this year mark,how many more???

Here's a pdf powerpoint loaded with diagrams about this subject,make your own mind up.
Redsunset is offline  
Thanks from:
09-09-2009, 13:15   #88
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,674
The latest global averaged satellite temperature data for June 2009 reveals yet another drop in the Earth's temperature. This latest drop in global temperatures means despite his dire warnings, the Earth has cooled .74°F since former Vice President Al Gore released "An Inconvenient Truth" in 2006.

According to the latest global satellite data courtesy of the University of Alabama in Huntsville and made into an easy to read graph by "For the record, this month's Al Gore / 'An Inconvenient Truth' Index indicates that global temperatures have plunged approximately .74°F (.39°C) since Gore's film was released," noted (See satellite temperature chart here with key dates noted, courtesy of - Also see: 8 Year Downtrend Continues in Global Temps)
Gore -- who is fond of saying the Earth has a "fever" -- has not yet addressed the simple fact that global temperatures have dropped since the release of his global warming film.
(Gore has also not addressed this: Another Moonwalker Defies Gore: NASA Astronaut Dr. Buzz Aldrin rejects global warming fears: 'Climate has been changing for billions of years' - Moonwalkers Defy Gore's Claim That Climate Skeptics Are Akin To Those Who Believe Moon Landing was 'Staged')
A record cool summer has descended upon many parts of the U.S. after predictions of the "year without a summer." There has been no significant global warming since 1995, no warming since 1998 and global cooling for the past few years. (Also see: Scientists Write Open Letter to Congress: 'Earth has been cooling for ten years' - 'Present cooling was NOT predicted by the alarmists' computer models, and has come as an embarrassment to them' - July 1, 2009)

In addition, New peer-reviewed scientific studies now predict a continued lack of global warming for up to three decades as natural climate factors dominate. (See: Climate Fears RIP...for 30 years!? - Global Warming could stop 'for up to 30 years! Warming 'On Hold?...'Could go into hiding for decades' study finds – – March 2, 2009 - And See: 'Global temps have flat lined since 2001...This is nothing like anything we've seen since 1950...Cooling trend could last for up to 30 years' - June 22, 2009 )
This means that today's high school kids being forced to watch Al Gore's “An Inconvenient Truth” – some of them 4 times in 4 different classes – will be nearly eligible for AARP (age 50) retirement group membership by the time warming resumes if these new studies turn out to be correct. (Editor's Note: Claims that warming will “resume” due to explosive heat in the "pipeline" have also been thoroughly debunked. See: Climatologist Dr. Roger Pielke Sr. 'There is no warming in the pipeline' )
Redsunset is offline  
Thanks from:
12-09-2009, 05:11   #89
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,674
Solar Physicist Predicts Ice Age. What happened to global warming?

Timo Niroma, a physicist from Finland, publishes a Solar Report each month. He has given his permission to use it and distribute it to all.


In the following Timo discusses the sunspot activity of the new, as yet not begun, cycle #24:
"So the activity of the cycle 24 has still been greatest in October-November 2008
by length (2 times 8 days). Also by size of the together 4 of size 80, 3
appeared in November 2008, and now one in June 2009.
Altogether there were six sunspot groups in June, but the five after the decent
spot in the beginning of June lasted from 1 to 3 days. The sunspot number of May
was 2.6.
From July 2008 to June 2009 the sunspot number has varied from 0.5 (July and
August 2008) to 4.1 (November 2008). December 2008 and March 2009 were also very
quiet (0.8 and 0.7). Besides in November the sunspot number was higher than in
June 2009 in October 2008 (2.9) and in May 2009 (2.9). So the 12 month activity
can be described as: ---++-----+. No trend so far."
The upshot of this is that there has no indication that the new cycle is about to start. One needs to know that as solar cycles drag on, the likelyhood becomes greater that the next cycle will be weaker. That translates to a cooler climate.

The following is interesting, as Timo says, because the previous cycle although not extraordinary had a much stronger build up than the new cycle #24. Here he describes the differences.
"It is interesting to note that during the previous cycle change 22/23 in 1996
there were only two months with SSN below 3 (September and October 1996). During
the on-going minimum there has been already 17 months below 3, 3 in 2007, 8 in
2008 and all 6 thus far in 2009 (i.e. all 2009 numbers up (until) today)."
What is being discussed next is the magnetic flux or intensity which is a strong indicator of climate. The 11 years is significant in that it is the mean of the solar cycle length. A curious point here is that few cycles are ever 11 years long but are either longer or shorter. Not sure why that is but it is curious. What he is saying is that during the previous cycle's minimum in 1995 and 1996, the magnetic flux was the same as the value 11 years later , at a time when the new cycle should be thinking of getting underway. However, at that point the divergence between the two cycles became evident. Cycle #24 is coming in like a lamb.
"The 10.7 cm fluxes of the sunspots were nearly equal at a distance of 11 years
in 1995-1996 versus 2006-2007:
1995 77 / 2006 80
1996 72 / 2007 73 (1996 was minimum between cycles 22/23)
And so began a dramatic separation in the solar magnetic flux. The cycle 23
began with vengeance in 1997, but the cycle 24 did not in 2008. In fact the
first and almost only decent spots in October-November 2008 did not affect the
flux, which in fact made its all-time (since late 1940's when first measured)
low in November-December 2008".
The number list that follows shows that 1997 and 2008 show a significantly lower intensity for the current minimum. Around 30% lower.
Here we find that we have to go back to some pretty cold times to find a similar solar pattern. The calculation of length of the current cycle #23 comes from the fact that you can only tell when a cycle is over, when the spots associated with the new cycle overpower the spots with the old cycle. Old cycle sunspots are observed near the solar equator whereas the new cycle sunspots are in the mid to high latitude areas (like Montreal on Earth) and are of opposite polarity magnetically.

"The yearly spot value of 2007 was already only 7.6 which is below the previous
minimum in 1996 (with 8.6). The value dropped to 2.6 in 2008 and the smoothed
value at the moment is 1.7 (December 2008). (In December 2007 it was 5.0 .) We
must go to the year 1913 to find a lower smoothed value (1.5). The November 2008
value means that the cycle 23 has at least a length of 12.6 years.
There has been only 2 cycles since 1749 longer than the cycle 23, the cycle 4
(1784-1798) just before the Dalton minimum and the cycle 6 (1810-1823 or the
second of the Dalton cycles). The cycle 9 (1843-1856) had about the same length
as we have now achieved (12.5 years). It began the series of 5 Jovian (Jupiter) cycles and
a cool climate in 1856-1913 (the Damon minimum)".

I won't go into all the details here, but the IPCC looks at solar irradiance as the only factor that determines the Sun's ability to warm the Earth's climate. If you count them up here, there are many other factors to be considered and they are all at an extreme low compared to our recent past. "Recent" is a relative term not indicating the past 10 or 20 years.
"Now what do we have:

1. Livingston-Penn observations that the magnetic strength
of the sunspots irrespective of their amount has linearly declined since at
least 1990 leading the spots vanishing in 2014 or 2015 if the trend continues.

2. A 50-year low in solar wind pressure: Measurements by the Ulysses spacecraft
reveal a 20% drop in solar wind pressure since the mid-1990's.

3. A 12 year low
in solar irradiance: the sun's brightness has dropped a whopping 6% at extreme
UV wavelengths since the solar minimum of 1996.

4. A 55-year low in solar radio
wavelengths. The lessening of radio emissions seems to be an indication of
weakness in the sun's global magnetic field.

5. The all-time low (since Maunder
minimum) of Gleissberg cycle in 2005 (72 years).

6. Ap Index very low.

7. TSI
(Total Solar Irradiance) at its lowest since satellite observations began in
1979 (1365 Watts)".

So here we start to get to the meat of the report. If you look at the data, there appears to be a cycle of 210 years at work here. This, by the way, is an often repeated cycle length for the Sun which has many cycles of various lengths.

"Autocorrelation of the sunspots since 1760 gives the highest correlation as 210

The Dalton minimum began in 1798".
Remember Dalton means, "Coooooold, Brrrr! Then we have this:
"The yearly sunspot numbers of 1795-1798 were 21, 16, 6.4 and 4.1,

corresponding values for 2005-2008 were 30, 15, 7.6 and 2.8.

The first full
Dalton year or 1799, had a SSN value of 6.8.

The SSN of the first 6 months of
2009 is 1.7".

The progressions illustrate that there is a similarity between the years prior to the Dalton, and the minimum leading up to the cycle #24 but lower than those leading up to the Dalton.
Next is an interesting list of Climatic periods in our past on Earth, all of which correlate with solar parameters at the time. Folks back then recorded a tremendous amount of information about the Sun and there were also proxy measurements available.

"Well, there was the 300-year Roman Optimum in 100 BC to AD 200, the 200-year
oscillation 200-900 (200 cold, 300 warm, 400 cold, 600-900 cold), the 300-year
Medieval Optimum 900-1200 (with some colder spells plus warm aftermaths), the
300-year Little Ice Age 1400-1700, the 300-year "Global Warming" 1700-2005 (with
some drawbacks especially in the 1800's). A NEW LIA WITH SPÖRER AND MAUNDER IN
That's 300 years of cold, in case you missed it! The Maunder minimum was the bottom of the Little Ice Age from which all IPCC temperature charts begin. That is because it was coldest then and makes the warming look worse. Had they started their charts during the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) we would be wondering why it is still so cool. Like when are we going to get to the good stuff.
And then we get the punch line:


This is pretty strong evidence. Had you been reading these reports for a few years you would have seen that Timo has been very conservative in his predictions. His earlier predictions were much less severe but trust me, you would be a lot happier with global warming than you will be with a Maunder type solar event.

Posting links of his studies on this subject,far too much info to put on here
Redsunset is offline  
(2) thanks from:
22-09-2009, 17:39   #90
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,674
Has cycle 24 suddenly got out of bed? there are now two sunspots and that has not happened in over a year.

Redsunset is offline  
Thanks from:
Post Reply

Quick Reply
Remove Text Formatting

Insert Image
Wrap [QUOTE] tags around selected text
Decrease Size
Increase Size
Please sign up or log in to join the discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Share Tweet