Category Archives: sun and climate

Why Climategate Won’t Stop The Greens


Lorrie Goldstein posted “Why Climategate Won’t Stop Greens” on the Toronto Sun Website with the lead-in paragraph as follows:

If you’re wondering how the robot-like march of the world’s politicians towards Copenhagen can possibly continue in the face of the scientific scandal dubbed “climategate,” it’s because Big Government, Big Business and Big Green don’t give a s*** about “the science.”

They never have.

Goldstein paints a gloomy picture and, unfortunately, she may be spot on.   We have all said that the politicians don’t really care about the science.  They are simply using the man-made global warming theory as a vehicle to tax and regulate.

Goldstein urges us to contact your political representatives and say that we want no part of Copenhagen.   Lets do it.

To read more of the blog,  click here.

Cbdakota

Another Maunder Minimum Underway?


The Maunder Minimum was a period of low solar activity characterized by few sunspots.  During the roughly 75 years of this Minimum,  global temperatures were well below normal.

David Archibald figures that the time between  Cycle 23 and Cycle 24 Solar Maximum will be 15 years.  The time between Solar Maximums is typically 11 years.

Archibald conclude based on the longer period of time between Maximums that:

“Activity and timing of the current minimum, as well as the timing of the Solar Cycle 24 maximum in 2015, is paralleling the start of the Maunder Minimum.  There is no data to date which diverges from the pattern of the start of the Maunder Minimum.”

sporerslawchart-2009

Dr Lief Svalgaard presented this chart at Solar Analogs II,  September 22, 2009. This chart plots sunspot locations across the face of the Sun during cycles 21, 22, 23 and the new cycle 24.  Svalgaard overlaid a green arrow on the trail of the sunspots toward the Equator. This movement is called Sporer’s Law and it is chacterized by this statement from Wikipedia:

“At the start of a sunspot cycle, sunspots tend to appear around 30° to 45° latitude on the Sun‘s surface. As the cycle progresses, sunspots appear at lower and lower latitudes, until they average 15° at solar maximum. The average latitude of sunspots then continues to drift lower, down to about 7° and then while the old sunspot cycle fades, sunspots of the new cycle start appearing at high latitudes.

Archibald  overlaid a yellow bar that is a measure of years between the cycle 23 and the developing cycle 24 and gets 15 years.    This is technique is consistent with the measured 10 years between the former Cycles 22 and 23.   The Solar cycles during the Maunder Minimum period averaged 20 years.

You can read all of David Archibald’s posting by clicking here.

Lief Svalgaard’s presentation at Solar Analogs II can be seen by clicking here.

Svalgaard is a little more reticent than Archibald  about predicting solar cycles,as you will see if you read his presentation.

While I am not a big leaguer like Svalgaard and Archibald,  it seems to me to be a little early to call a new Maunder Minimum.

Cbdakota

OCT 09-US 3RD COLDEST SINCE 1895


TEMPS October_2009Joe D’Aleo has guest posted, on WattsUpWithThat,  information about current temperatures.  He prepared the chart shown above.  All but 7 of the lower 48 States had temperatures below normal in October 2009.

Remember,  Climate is measured in 10, 20 or more years.  What you are seeing in this posting is weather,  but this cold October is part of a trend of cooling global temperatures in this decade.  If this goes on for several more years we’ll have confirmed Climate cooling.  To read all of the story click here

Cbdakota

I have been doing only limited posting for several weeks as I am working on my Daughter’s house, preparing to put it on the market.  Two more weeks–I hope will finish it.

 

SPPI Monthly CO2 Report–September


This month’s CO2 report highlights charts of atmospheric global temperature, Ocean Heat Content, atmospheric CO2 content, sea level and additional discussions about Arctic and Antarctic sea ice, hurricane and tropical cyclone activity, a discussion of CO2 residence time in the atmosphere, etc.  See full report here

Cbdakota

Revision-Ocean Heat Content Updated



There is a correction to the data I posted on 12 Oct. with regard to the drop in Ocean Heat Content.

The following is a note from Bob Tisdale discussing this error:

After I posted the above, I found that Dr. Geert Jan van Oldenborgh had emailed me to notify me of the correction. I have received his permission to reproduce his email:

Dear Bob Tisdale,

please note that NODC discovered that they had accidentally posted the wrong version of their last file (apr-jun2009), a preliminary version with most data still missing had somehow made it to their web site. A quick look at the map for that quarter showed that there were hardly any anomalies visible and big anomalies in the North Atlantic and Pacific did not persist from the previous quarter, so the data were clearly suspicious. This mix-up has been fixed tonight (Dutch time) at NODC and in the Climate Explorer. A corrected version of the average heat content is attached, the value of apr-jun2009 is now more in line with the values of previous quarters.

Greetings from chilly Holland,

Geert Jan

The revised chart can be seen here

cbdakota




BBC Says The Earth Is Cooling


No hot flashes here, no pun intended, because for most of us, the fact that the Earth is cooling is not new news. However, for one of the biggest media outlets that is seemingly 100% in tune with the man-made global (AGW) warming theory to frankly admit it is cooling is a surprise.  To read their posting, click here.

The biggest laugh in the BBC article is when the UK Met office says their Centre

“…. incorporates solar variation and ocean cycles into its climate models, and that they are nothing new.  In fact, the centre says they are just two of the whole host of known factors that influence global temperatures – all of which are accounted for by its models.

Get that  “all of which are accounted for by its models.”   If all are accounted for, then they would have predicted this cooling.  How it is that scientists of all stripes can hear organizations says such obviously bogus things and be silent?  The only explanation it seems is,  they fear retribution meted out by the AGWers’ right arm,  the media like the BBC.

The BBC says that two years ago a research team seemed to rule out solar influence.

The scientists’ main approach was simple: to look at solar output and cosmic ray intensity over the last 30-40 years, and compare those trends with the graph for global average surface temperature.

And the results were clear. “Warming in the last 20 to 40 years can’t have been caused by solar activity,” said Dr Piers Forster from Leeds University, a leading contributor to this year’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).”

I know I can not prove that the Sun is responsible for global warming and cooling but, come on, the level of solar activity seems to be the most promising correlation anywhere to be found.

I have said this before, and here I go again:  Even though the exact mechanism linking the Sun and global climate change has not yet been definitively established, it is kind of like gravity—it is obvious even if we do not yet fully understand how it works.

cbdakota

The Weakness of the AGW Theory


The “American Thinker” blog has an article by John McLaughlin that shows the weakness of the man-made global warming (AGW) theory.  The article Global Warming ‘Science’ discusses the fact that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, sponsored by the UN, was ..

Since its inception in 1988, the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has sought to evaluate the risk of climate change brought about by human activity.  There has never been a requirement to also evaluate potential natural causes.”

The author discusses the impact the infamous Hockey Stick Temperature Graph had on the IPCC reports.

Their reports include a graph derived from mathematical models showing average global temperatures back to 1000 AD.  The graph appears relatively flat for over 900 years.  Then, about 1920, temperatures begin to rocket upward with but a brief pause around 1970 before heading still higher with no relief in sight.  So startling was this graph when it first appeared, it became known as the “Hockey Stick” chart.  The IPCC concluded the graph’s sudden change in character during the early 20th Century correlated with the introduction and increasing use of fossil fuel energy in that period, and that production of carbon dioxide (CO2) represented the principal man-made greenhouse gas culprit.

hockey stick graph

The Hockey Stick Temperature Graph

(Note, no medieval warm period & the “hockey stick” jump in temperatures)


Then he walks you through the story of how the Graph was exposed as a fraud:

As political hysteria over “man-made” or anthropogenic global warming (AGW) increased, other scientists began checking the mathematical analysis and measurements behind the hockey stick chart because it did not correlate with other known historical temperature data.  In 2003 Professor McKitrick teamed with a Canadian engineer, Steve McIntyre, in attempting to replicate the chart and finally debunked it as statistical nonsense.  They revealed how the chart was derived from “collation errors, unjustified truncation or extrapolation of source data, obsolete data, incorrect principal component calculations, geographical mislocations and other serious defects” — substantially affecting the temperature index.

And perhaps worse,  the National Academy of Sciences’ Committee on Applied and Theoretical Statistics concluded that:

“……the statistical methodology underpinning the hockey stick version was, indeed, profoundly flawed.  The Wegman panel submitted a report to the U.S. House of Representatives (which should have been available to all House members including Rep. Waxman) which cited results of an earlier National Research Council panel endorsing the work and results of McIntyre and McKitrick.  Wegman’s work also found the McIntyre and McKitrick analysis independently verifiable, their observations of the IPCC flaws correct and “valid,” and their arguments “compelling.”

McLaughlin also demonstrates that man-made carbon dioxide (CO2) can not be a significant cause of global warming.

Numerous gases make up the Earth’s atmosphere.  Of these, nitrogen represents about 78% by volume,  oxygen comprises just under 21%, and other gases (including “greenhouse gases”) make up slightly over 1% by volume remaining.  Of the principal greenhouse gases, water vapor is by far the most prevalent.  Second place belongs to carbon dioxide (CO2) at 0.04% with methane and nitrous oxide finishing a very distant third and fourth.

What complicates analysis of any manmade greenhouse effect is the relatively overwhelming prevalence of water vapor — a gas ignored by the IPCC.  The U.S. Department of Energy estimates water vapor makes up 95% of identified greenhouse gases and, of that amount, less than 0.001% can be attributed to manmade causes.  Thus, the IPCC and AGW proponents have focused on CO2 as the principal anthropogenic greenhouse gas.”

And :

Put another way, if accumulation of greenhouse gases has any impact on global warming, Department of Energy data indicates nearly 99.9% would have to be attributed to natural causes.  Nevertheless, AGW proponents blame approximately 1/1000 of all produced planetary CO2 — this trace gas  which, in its totality, comprises less than 4/10,000 of the atmosphere — as the principal cause of climate change because it provides the only way to link global warming to human activity.

Numerous scientists and climatologists point to the terrible flaw that the IPCC analysis totally ignores the impact upon climate of solar activity, water vapor, and effects of cloud formation on global air pressure, temperature and winds.  As Dr. Tim Ball, a former climate scientist at the University of Winnipeg, put it:  “The analogy that I use is that my car is not running that well, so I’m going to ignore the engine (which is the sun) and I’m going to ignore the transmission (which is the water vapor) and I’m going to look at one nut on the right rear wheel (which is the human-produced CO2) … the science is that bad!

He discusses that fact that actual data regarding global warming and sea level rise contradict the alarmists’ scare stories;  the fallacy of the “Consensus “ argument; and finishes with conclusions that contradict the thinking ChairmanWaxman used to justify the House of Representatives passing of the Cap and Trade bill.  To read the article in its entirety,  click here

Many things have recently come to light that further contradict the man-made global warming theory.    I will try to bring those to you in future blogs.

See    The Weakness of the AGW Theory-Part 2

The Weakness of the AGW Theory-Part 3

Cbdakota

August CO2 Report


The Science and Public Policy Institute’s monthly CO2 report is now available.   It contain articles on OCEAN HEAT BUILDUP,  SEA LEVELS,  PREDICTIONS OF ATMOSPHERIC CO2 CONCENTRATIONS IN 2100,  THE QUITE SUN, WHY THE GREAT ICESHEETS WONT COLLAPSE,  ARCTIC  SEA  ICE  AREA, ETC.

Click here to read the report.

Cbdakota

4 Billion Years of Climate Change


For the past several weeks, I have been planning on sending the link to  “The Grand View: 4 Billion Years Of Climate Change”.  The article is from the book “The Resilient Earth” by Doug Hoffman and Allen Simmons. It is really informative and for those of us that can’t keep on geological Eras, Periods, or the years relating to them straight,  it is a reference you might want to keep.

early_bombardment-500 Early Earth–From “The Resilient Earth

To give you a taste of what is covered, look at the following:

Observations

That concludes our whirlwind tour of Earth’s climate history. There are a number of observations that can be made from our overview of the Phanerozoic:

Earth’s temperature is always changing.

Over time there have been periods when it has been colder than it is today.

For most of the Phanerozoic it has been much warmer than it is today.

Life has persisted during periods both hot and cold.

There is no one “right” temperature.

Carbon dioxide has always been present in Earth’s atmosphere.

Over time there have been periods when CO2 has increased and decreased     naturally.

For most of the Phanerozoic it has been much higher than it is today.

Life has persisted during periods with high CO2 and low CO2.

CO2 levels will change with or without human contributions.

Over time there have been a number of ice ages—Life has endured multiple ice ages.

For most of the Phanerozoic there have been no persistent polar ice caps.

eras_and_periods-250

Eras and Periods from The Resilient Earth

To read the  article   click here

Cbdakota

Spotless Days


As of today, 26 August, 2009, the sun has not had a sunspot  for 47 days.  Since 1849, this is the 5th longest period without sunspots. If there are no sunspots in the next two days,  the new total of 49 will put this period in 4th place.   The number 1 period was 92 days long without a sunspot and that occurred in 1913.  See chart below for other long periods without sunspots.

The sun’s activity remains low with the 10.7 solar radio flux at 67. If you are unfamiliar with this measurement, the following from my entry   “Sun and Climate—an  Essay”  should help:

Another indicator of the Sun’s activity is the 10.7 cm (2800 MHz) radio flux.  This measurement is the amount of solar noise that is emitted by the sun at 10.7 cm wavelengths. Some consider it to be better than Sunspots as an indicator of solar activity.  The solar flux is measured and reported at approximately 1700 UT daily.   It can vary from values below 50 to values in excess of 300 (representing very low solar activity and high to very high solar activity respectively). Values in excess of 200 occur typically during the peak of the solar cycles.

PERIODS WITH SPOTLESS DAYS (>20DAYS) SINCE 1849

Courtesy of Solaemon’s Spotless Days Page

Spotlessoverview

Cbdakota