Global cooling

The sun has gone quiet…solar cycle 24 continues to rank as one of the weakest cycles more than a century is the story. And this is why it matters:

If history is a guide, it is safe to say that weak solar activity for a prolonged period of time can have a negative impact on global temperatures in the troposphere which is the bottom-most layer of Earth’s atmosphere – and where we all live. There have been two notable historical periods with decades-long episodes of low solar activity. The first period is known as the “Maunder Minimum”, named after the solar astronomer Edward Maunder, and it lasted from around 1645 to 1715. The second one is referred to as the “Dalton Minimum”, named for the English meteorologist John Dalton, and it lasted from about 1790 to 1830. Both of these historical periods coincided with below-normal global temperatures in an era now referred to by many as the “Little Ice Age”. In addition, research studies in just the past couple of decades have found a complicated relationship between solar activity, cosmic rays, and clouds on Earth. This research suggests that in times of low solar activity where solar winds are typically weak; more cosmic rays reach the Earth’s atmosphere which, in turn, has been found to lead to an increase in certain types of clouds that can act to cool the Earth.

I realise the left has a great deal invested in global warming, but if they are wrong, and there’s plenty to show that they are, then they are preparing for a very different kind of future from the one we are actually going to have. Warmer makes the planet more lush, specially if accompanied by increased concentrations of carbon dioxide. Colder shortens growing seasons and increases the need for an ability to heat our homes. In my own lifetime, the planet’s population has risen from two billion to seven billion. If the world is warming, we can accommodate the lot. If it is cooling, we cannot, specially if we go out of our way to impair our ability to develop economical forms of energy supplies.

This entry was posted in Global warming and climate change policy. Bookmark the permalink.

72 Responses to Global cooling

  1. Toiling Mass

    You just know that some climate-charlatan or other is goingt to come up with some idiotic theory ‘proving’ our CO2 controls the sun.

    And won’t it get a lot of press?

  2. incoherent rambler

    An extended cool period in the Northern hemisphere would be excellent news for exports of Australian coal, gas, uranium, thorium and grain We may get out of this mess yet.

  3. Bruce of Newcastle

    The global temperature has been cooling since 2002 in spite of the excitable global warming prognosticators like our Christine yesterday.

    My model suggests we’re in for some more cooling, and Dr David Evans’ recently published model suggests the same.

    But I wouldn’t worry too much about food as we humans are quite innovative:

    Hyper-Efficient Indoor Vegetable Factories Prove Malthus Wrong, Again

    Closely controlled using specially-designed LED lamps, the farm opened earlier this month and is already said to be producing 10,000 heads of lettuce a day. [...]

    [The] farm uses 17,500 LED lights spread over 18 cultivation racks, reaching 16 levels high – and these lights are used to mimic day and night. By monitoring the photosynthesis process carefully, the system grows lettuce two-and-a-half times faster than an outdoor farm. It also cuts waste product by 40 per cent and productivity per square foot is up 100-fold.

    The biggest problem is the climateers don’t seem to care about starving poor people, or they wouldn’t be forcing up food prices via policies like the ethanol and biodiesel mandates. But in theory so long as we have energy we have food. And coal plants can provide plenty of CO2 and warmth for the growing plants in such setups.

  4. rickw

    Global Cooling, what’s not to like? Green idiots wrong, plus as IC said, a bunch of money to be made!

  5. TerjeP

    An extended cool period in the Northern hemisphere would be excellent news for exports of Australian coal, gas, uranium, thorium and grain We may get out of this mess yet.

    If somebody manages to commercialise energy from Thorium the energy yield will be too high to create much in the way of an export boom. More likely our coal exports would tank. That said I think it would be a wonderful development for the world.

  6. TerjeP

    Just to quantify my point above the entire US electricity supply if supplied by Thorium reactors would require just three shipping containers of Thorium fuel each year. A tiny, tiny quantity that will not employ many miners anywhere.

  7. Elizabeth (Lizzie) B.

    Brrrrr.

    Greenhouse could come to have a whole new meaning.
    Those massive plastic things you see all over Europe growing food will multiply everywhere.
    And we’ll need lots and lots of fuel to heat them.

  8. Alfonso

    To correct some of the amateur enthusiast comment re Emirates on the other thread.
    Emirates hasn’t flown near Ukraine for 3-4 months, a company notice to pilots established that SOP.
    Emirates doesn’t fly over Syria or even Libya or Israeli. It doesn’t fly into Peshwar Pakistan since the PIA hosty was shot through the fuselage on approach.

    To fly from Dubai to Beirut Emirates uses much additional fuel to route out into the Med, the final leg inbound is from the west.
    Emirates is a first world airline due to its predominantly first world pilots and flight department and lots of money that translates into new aircraft.

  9. A Lurker

    If it is cooling, and I suspect it is, then I might look at investing in shares in greenhouse manufacturing companies…

  10. Trish

    What a strange notion to suggest that the sun has something to do with the global temperature instead of what tax we pay or emissions we trade.
    Next you will be telling us it is the sun which provides daylight.
    Oh, wait a minute!!!

  11. People, and in particular the Greens, who blether about “tackling climate change” should consider that dangerous coolth can take hold extremely quickly, so emergency and precautionary measures (such as stockpiling materials for the immediate construction of glasshouses and huge shelters for herds, providing heating to enable frozen soils to be tilled) ought to be planned already. In the last little ice-age, witnesses in higher parts of Europe reported seeing ice advance over fields at a rate of two musket-shots—a couple of furlongs, say, or 400m—a day.

  12. MemoryVault

    But I wouldn’t worry too much about food as we humans are quite innovative:

    Bruce you’ve posted that info before and while I have no doubts about the science or the engineering of what is possible, you continually gloss over the energy requirements of such endeavours. In case you haven’t noticed, the people who have been screaming “glow ball warmening” these past couple of decades, are the very same people responsible for the misdirected investment into “renewable energy”, not to mention the conversion of food into fuel.

    Throw in on top of that the continued effects of the GFC and the truth is, the western world is facing the prospect of a cooling planet politically, financially and energy bankrupt, with about 30% of our export food capacity diverted to the manufacture of ethanol.

    Now throw in top of that the waiting time for a decent size generator – say 500 MW – from GE is currently three to five years, plus five years or more for the turbine to spin it, and you start to get a glimpse of what we are facing, even if we started right now – which isn’t going to happen.

  13. egg_

    An extended cool period in the Northern hemisphere would be excellent news for exports of Australian coal, gas, uranium, thorium and grain We may get out of this mess yet.

    From previous, iced-over wind turbines in Europe/NH?

  14. egg_

    TerjeP
    #1386490, posted on July 18, 2014 at 2:28 pm

    Isn’t Bill Gates championing this for China/3rd World countries?
    China are putting in nuclear, but are also still building new coal plants?

  15. cohenite

    Definitely cooling. No heat going into the ocean. This could be the high point of this interglacial, as good as it gets. The energy sources are there, coal, gas, oil uranium, thorium but as noted development time is considerable. The consolation will be looking at the rusting wind and solar farms as we freeze.

    The filth really need to be held to account for their slime.

  16. wreckage

    The funny thing is, this solar minimum stuff would have been a great way to explain-away less-than-predicted warming… but not only have they argued themselves into a corner about the sun being irrelevant, they are so irrevocably wedded to that idea that they cannot seem to regroup, recalibrate, acknowledge that solar is a factor, and push on from there.

    Again, this suggests “bad science”; they can’t even accept partial vindication; either The Righteous are right, or The Infidel are; and the latter simply cannot, must not, will not be true.

  17. Demosthenes

    The global temperature has been cooling since 2002

    12 years? I thought it was 17?

  18. incoherent rambler

    If you are confident of a cooling cycle then I guess you would be putting your money into energy stocks and QLD real estate.

  19. cohenite

    12 years? I thought it was 17?

    Statistically speaking there is a difference between over 17 years of flat or non-rising temperatures and 12 years of cooling.

  20. .Dr.Sir Fred Lenin

    I have been a strong advocate of Global Cooling for hours and hours,I am about to become a Global Cooling Activite,can I have a Guvmint Grant paid into my Cayman Island Account? Please Please Mr or Ms Guvmint person!

  21. I’m inclined to stay skeptical across the board. The last time the sun went quiet like this there was mud and cold on the Western Front but ferocious heat and drought in Eastern Oz. 1914 and 1915 seem to have been worse in some areas than the Fed Drought years.

    Maybe it’s just the sun, but we actually live on a hot ball whose insides nobody knows much about. Every theory about climate involves the oceans, but there’s not much traffic down in the deep hydrosphere, and no traffic at all in that hot, plasticky asthenosphere which is not far at all from the bottom of the oceans. Think we need more of that old style science where one goes and takes a look before opening one’s gob…let alone publishing.

    Climate science seems to be an anti-Enterprise, where you boldly don’t go where nobody had gone.

  22. Demosthenes

    Statistically speaking there is a difference between over 17 years of flat or non-rising temperatures and 12 years of cooling.

    So what about the 8 years of warming? Or is there a limit to how short a time period we can look at? ;-)

  23. handjive

    Quoting Demosthenes
    #1386805, posted on July 18, 2014 at 6:17 pm
    “So what about the 8 years of warming?
    Or is there a limit to how short a time period we can look at?”
    . . .
    Considering it took only 8 years from the end of the 70′s ice age scare until Hansen’s famous 1988 open window/no air-con doomsday global warming presentation to congress …

  24. MemoryVault

    So what about the 8 years of warming? Or is there a limit to how short a time period we can look at?

    On a graph that depicts any form of cyclical pattern, you can prove anything simply by choosing your start and end points. The shorter the period, the easier it becomes to “prove” black is white, and vice versa. So-called “climate science” rests heavily on this fact.

    Back before the “global warming” hysteria took hold, it was generally accepted that temperatures went in a cycle of (roughly) 30 years warming, followed by (roughly) 30 years cooling. Since the LIA at least, this has been a pretty good match. It is also a pretty good match with solar activity, if one allows for the mitigating/multiplying effects of the PDO, AMO and other cyclical ocean currents and temperature fluctuations.

    It is also interesting to note that “extreme” weather events seem to occur mostly during the periods of change of direction of the 30 year warming/cooling cycle. For instance, flooding of the Brisbane River almost always occurs in the swing periods.

  25. vlad

    the planet’s population has risen from two billion to seven billion. If the world is warming, we can accommodate the lot. If it is cooling, we cannot

    we could accommodate seventeen billion on either scenario provided the will was there to do so.

  26. MemoryVault

    we could accommodate seventeen billion on either scenario provided the will and energy source was there to do so.

    FIFY

  27. Leo G

    “Every theory about climate involves the oceans, but there’s not much traffic down in the deep hydrosphere, and no traffic at all in that hot, plasticky asthenosphere which is not far at all from the bottom of the oceans”- Robert

    The heat inferred to be transferred toward the surface from plate tectonics is only a tenth of that needed to explain the oceanic warming trend over the past few centuries (implied by sea level rise).
    I agree that we should be skeptical about very small variations in solar irradiance being the determinant for warming/cooling cycles, when there are such obvious negative feedbacks. More likely that the key factor is the sum of the elemental products of sea surface area and surface irradiance as varied by sea level change, with perturbation by other transient phenomena.

  28. Bruce of Newcastle

    Demosthenes – I graph from 2002 because there is a clear and unambiguous cooling over that period.

    In the satellite data the world has not warmed for 17 years and 49 weeks, to be slightly silly.

    As I pointed out the cooling since 2002 is consistent with the predictions from CAGW sceptics. We are presently right at the peak of the current solar cycle and that props up the temperature by as much as 0.1 C. So as we drop off the current weak double peak to the long fall to the minimum around 2022 that prop will disappear.

    It’ll be fun to watch what Christine Milne makes of the accelerated cooling given her ‘we’re all going to fry and Abbott666 will be blamed’ outburst in the Senate.

    BTW my expectation is the July RSS number will be high because of the weak pre-El Nino in the Pacific right now, so we probably won’t hit 18 years of flatness for a few months yet.

  29. blogstrop

    but if they are wrong, and there’s plenty to show that they are
    Then they should be sent to something resembling a Maoist China Wrong Thinking Correction Labour Camp for about 20 years.

  30. wreckage

    Thank God the Carbon Tax got repealed, or the Left would lionize Julia as the woman who personally stopped and reversed Global Warming. We’d never hear the end of it.

  31. egg_

    but if they are wrong, and there’s plenty to show that they are
    Then they should be sent to something resembling a Maoist China Wrong Thinking Correction Labour Camp for about 20 years.

    Or until they thaw out. ;)

  32. cohenite

    So what about the 8 years of warming? Or is there a limit to how short a time period we can look at? ;-)

    Let’s nail this. The official period which must lapse before weather becomes climate is 17 years.

    There are 4 main temperature indices, 2 land based, HadCrut and GISS, and 2 satellites, UAH and RSS.

    To establish a non-rising trend over a period in the data, you establish the furtherest 2 consecutive months of negative temperature trend from the present. Then plot the trend from the next month to the present. The statistical criteria for a flat trend is obviously different from a cooling trend and are explained by Werner Brozek .

    Brozek uses 2 different criteria; the first from NOAA to test for flatness or zero warming; the second from Dr Phil Jones to test for no statistical warming; the 2 criteria overlap with the second allowing for some slight warming and the first for even cooling. As a result he finds:

    1. For GISS, the slope is flat since September 2004 or 9 years, 9 months. (goes to May)
    2. For Hadcrut3, the slope is flat since September 2000 or 13 years, 9 months. (goes to May)
    3. For a combination of GISS, Hadcrut3, UAH and RSS, the slope is flat since January 2001 or 13 years, 5 months. (goes to May)
    4. For Hadcrut4, the slope is flat since January 2001 or 13 years, 5 months. (goes to May)
    5. For Hadsst3, the slope is flat since January 2001 or 13 years, 5 months. (goes to May)
    6. For UAH, the slope is flat since January 2005 or 9 years, 5 months. (goes to May using version 5.5)
    7. For RSS, the slope is flat since September 1996 or 17 years, 9 months (goes to May).

    So, no cherry picking, official data and criteria is used and AGW by RSS measurement is stuffed with the others not that far behind especially since such a pause was not predicted by the models.

  33. MartinG

    Where’s our climate troll Stefan?

    While I’m here I’ll see if this works right.

    Sunspot history

  34. hammy

    If it is cooling, we cannot, specially if we go out of our way to impair our ability to develop economical forms of energy supplies.

    …And the denialists reckon we believers are unduly alarmist! Who’s this bloke kidding?

  35. MemoryVault

    …And the denialists reckon we believers are unduly alarmist!

    Sometimes, hammy, there are things worthy of becoming duly alarmed about.
    The planet cooling and the subsequent shortening of growing seasons in the NH, is one of them.
    My personal estimate (and I’ve been working on this since 1988) is that between one and two billion people are going to die over the next decade or so.
    That’s just the ones who will die from starvation and cold. On top of that there’s the forced migrations of millions of refugees, and the bloodshed and wars that will follow.

    Of course, I accept that for a Malthusian eugenicist like yourself, this is all good news, and no cause for alarm whatsoever.

  36. egg_

    Has the Hammybot converted to renewables, or still a slave to the grid?

  37. Leo G

    ” converted to renewables, or still a slave to the grid?”

    Accept ranular balls or be a plutean larva. No healthier choices?

  38. Danzig_misfit

    This sounds like bullshit, my friends on Facebook threatening to kill me when the revolution happens can’t be wrong.

  39. daggers

    So somewhere like the Philippines would be an ideal place to live for aging, well-off, retired Westerners who hate the cold ? Maybe there will be an economic fallout for tropical countries which can grow food and export it to the rest of the world.

  40. Eyrie

    Cohenite, the peak of the current interglacial was 8000 years ago or so during the Holocene Climate Optimum.
    It has been downhill with some fluctuations since then.

  41. Demosthenes

    The official period which must lapse before weather becomes climate is 17 years.

    No, it’s 30 years.

    So, no cherry picking

    Riiiight. Just one of seven measures, and you happen to pick the one that suits you best, while ignoring all the others.

    especially since such a pause was not predicted by the models.

    Models can’t predict specific “pauses”, but their projections do include pauses of a decade or more.

    Also, you know that RSS uses a climate model to adjust the raw data, right?

  42. egg_

    Demosthenes
    #1387682, posted on July 19, 2014 at 2:55 pm

    The psychotropic drug advocate – posting straight or ripped?

  43. Demosthenes

    7. For RSS, the slope is flat since September 1996 or 17 years, 9 months (goes to May).

    And yet if you extend it just another 9 months, the slope shifts to positive. What does that tell you?

  44. And when you have increasd ice? Well that is water that’s not falling on crops. Crops struggle in the cold!

    Dunno if you’ve noticed? When food prices get into the stratosphere, heh :) so to speek, unrest shortly follows!

    We’re headed for a period of disruption and danger like humanity has never seen! Te war machine now has nukes.

    Brozinski said…. “It is now easier to kill a million people than control them” Lookout!

  45. Bruce of Newcastle

    No, it’s 30 years.

    No Demos, its 60-65 years.

    The 30 years meme has been invented by the climateers because they know quite well that the ~60 year cycle in the oceans adds about 0.25-0.3 C to global temperature since the cycle bottom in 1970. The 30 years is half the cycle. If you draw a straight line from the bottom of a sine curve to the top you get a nice rising trend. Its an artefact.

    The reason why we have a flat trend for nearly 18 years is we are drawing our straight line alone the top of the hump of a sine curve.

    The climateers can’t acknowledge the sinusoidal signal because it drops about 40% off ECS if it is included in the calc, which alone would probably make CO2 able to be considered harmless. The Sun drops a bit more than that, again, off it which is why CO2 is actually harmless.

  46. Demosthenes

    No Demos, its 60-65 years.

    So why do you cite 17 years as relevant?

  47. Bruce of Newcastle

    Because it shows the sinusoidal curve. Drawing a line across the top of such a curve means the period of flatness extends 2 months for every month which passes. We have been seeing exactly that.

    I want the IPCC modellers to include the ocean cyclic effect in their models and also the full effect of the Sun. That would kill this false CAGW alarm stone cold dead because the calculated ECS value from their models would immediately come out as less than 1 C/doubling.

    Also the shorter period is important because the climateers first said 15 years, then 17 years, so its their words which is haunting them.

  48. Ellen of Tasmania

    “The Ninth International Conference on Climate Change, which took place on July 7-9, 2014 in Las Vegas, Nevada, USA, attracted some 650 scientists, economists, policy experts, and guests willing to question whether man-made global warming is a problem worth addressing. The event was hosted by The Heartland Institute, had 32 cosponsors, and featured 64 keynoters and panelists.”

    All the lectures are on line: http://climateconference.heartland.org

    ““I am heartened by the knowledge that we here gathered today will fight on – for honest science, affordable energy, accountable government, and better lives for billions of people — and against the dark forces of climate fanaticism. I also know we are being joined by more and more countries, as they increasingly understand the true nature of this ideological conflict.”

    Paul Driessen
    Panel 21: Global Warming as a Social Movement”

    (Just in case you didn’t know.)

  49. Demosthenes

    The sinusoid pattern isn’t flat, Bruce.

    the calculated ECS value from their models would immediately come out as less than 1 C/doubling

    Ah yes, the magically changing laws of physics to account for paleoclimate data.

  50. Bruce of Newcastle

    The sinusoid pattern isn’t flat, Bruce.

    Demosthenes, I do happen to know science and stats pretty well, not least since I have a published paper on statistical modelling.

    I assumed you would understand what I was saying. Why don’t you get that graph of HadCRUT and draw a line across the top of one of the cycles yourself, eh? Get a ruler and hold it up to your device screen.

    I included the detrended HadCRUT graph from Scafetta 2010 so you could see the cycle clearly without the rising trend.

    As for the paleo data, you give me a full-paper link and I will take it apart for you. You do know that CO2 rises after temperature rises don’t you? Which is simple aqueous chemistry.

    And that pCO2 and global temperature in the data do not correlate?

    There is no CAGW happening Demosthenes for very good reasons grounded in the real world data. Unless the left can ditch their fantasy they are going to be in for a very hard fall.

  51. Stephan

    And that pCO2 and global temperature in the data do not correlate?

    This is a most unscientific and shoddy graph. Here is a more accurate one.

    You do know that CO2 rises after temperature rises don’t you?

    90% of temperature increase follows C02 increases.

  52. Haha.

    This is a most unscientific and shoddy graph. Here is a more accurate one.

    Stephan. The last centimetre of Bruce’s graph encompasses the range of yours. If you want to compare something on equal basis please introduce a graph of similar range. Why choose a graph from SS anyway? Get the original, its frequently quoted. You cant trust SS on much.

  53. Stephan

    The last centimetre of Bruce’s graph encompasses the range of yours.

    I wouldn’t even call that one a graph, a laughably poor sketch is more like it.

    This is a scientific attempt at temperaure reconstruction for the past 600 m.y. through geological records. Note the distinct lack of hundred-million-year-long blocks of stable 22 degree temperatures.

  54. Bruce of Newcastle

    Stephan – I just knew some warmist would jump on that particular graph.

    So I will link you to the original which has the citation for you to go get.

    Idiot.

    And you linked SkS instead of an official source too. Idiot^2.

    And as I pointed out CO2 follows temperature because of chemistry. When temperature rises [CO2] falls in seawater.

    If you cannot get it through your skull that temperature rises are mainly a solar-terrestrial phenomenon (hint: look at the δ18O trace in the graph RHS then look at the SkS graph, you idiot cubed you), and that pCO2 on the meso scale (your graph) follows temperature, and that on the paleo scale CO2 and temperature are not correlated, then you are as thick as the East Antarctic ice cap and just as brainess. Sheesh!

    How dumb can an undergraduate student be and still feed themselves? Well I’m starting to see the answer to my question.

  55. Bruce of Newcastle

    I am sorry, Stephan, to apply abuse however melodramatic. I should not have done. Sorry. But you spout SkS talking points like one who recently was trained.

    Do you not understand the difference between ideology and science yet?

    You will need to learn. Science is what it is. You cannot force it into a hole which it doesn’t fit, no matter how much money you apply to the attempt. It will bust out and sink the climateers into obscurity, and if there’s any justice in the world, 4 x 3 cells with solid steel bars.

  56. Stephan

    Bruce, did you notice my second post which showed (here again) that the ‘skeptic’ ‘graph’ you supplied is just a poorly drawn sketch with no basis in scientific reality?

    There are no extended (100,000,000 year+) blocks of 22 degree average temperature. Please tell me you can see that much?

    Then when we look at the correlation between C02 and temperature of the past ~million years, we find they are highly correlated, with 90% of the temperature increases following C02.

  57. Stephan

    It will bust out and sink the climateers into obscurity, and if there’s any justice in the world, 4 x 3 cells with solid steel bars.

    Of course. Lock up the heretic scientists (97% in this field) who threaten your worldview. Very dictatorial, very concerning.

  58. Bruce of Newcastle

    Last I saw the nations of the world do lock up white collar criminals when they defraud their populations billions of dollars. I believe the heirarchy of Enron is growing older and greyer with ebvery day they serve their legally applied sentences.

    The climateers have defrauded the world a lot more than Enron ever did.

  59. Bruce of Newcastle

    They have also killed a lot more people than Enron ever did.

  60. Stephan

    I believe the heirarchy of Enron is growing older and greyer with ebvery day they serve their legally applied sentences.

    The climateers have defrauded the world a lot more than Enron ever did.

    The upper management of all the largest banks during the GFC should be jailed. Wolfowitz, Cheney, Bush and Rumsfeld should be jailed. Sometimes justice doesn’t happen I suppose.

  61. George Brandis thanks for NOTHING

    Bruce, I humbly submit that you start publishing your own blog.

    Onegaishimasu

  62. Bruce of Newcastle

    The white pieces are mine. White is for truth. Stephan can have the black ones. I still have a set floating around somewhere, but haven’t played for several decades.

  63. egg_

    The white pieces are mine. White is for truth. Stephan can have the black ones. I still have a set floating around somewhere, but haven’t played for several decades.

    You weren’t playing marbles – but Stephan’s lost a few?

  64. incoherent rambler

    The climateers have defrauded the world a lot more than Enron ever did.

    Bruce, now you are talking my language.
    The same people have caused enormous damage to your beloved science.

    Consider one local example, the rent on the CCA building would fund emergency surgery for how many children per annum? What would you prefer to have?

    Fund Flannery’s position or fund another emergency surgeon (or two)?

  65. George Brandis thanks for NOTHING

    Bruce, the page on Milankovitch Cycles is great stuff.

    In all my reading and listening on this topic, I have never heard a single Climate Loon ever once make reference to them.

    They really believe that carbon dioxide is the key to understanding temperature. And they want everyone else to believe it. And they won’t admit they might be wrong. And they won’t brook any dissent.

    As you say: reality, and reality-based science, will be what trips them up.

  66. incoherent rambler

    Richard Feynman’s “Cargo Cult Science”

    http://neurotheory.columbia.edu/~ken/cargo_cult.html

  67. Bruce of Newcastle

    It occurs to me that people may not generally know: the solubility of gases in water goes down with rising temperature, which is the reverse of most soluble solids like sugar and salt.

    So when a chemist like me looks at that Inconvenient Truth 500 megayear graph and notes that temperature rise precedes CO2 rise by several hundred years they would tend to say ‘of course’.

    I could probably do a model based on Criss & Cobble thermodynamic tables to calculate pCO2 from the temperature. It’d almost certainly replicate the measured data.

  68. Stephan

    W.r.t. Milankovich cycles:

    Eccentricity is the only Milankovitch cycle that alters the annual-mean global solar insolation (i.e., the total energy the planet receives from the sun at the top of the atmosphere)… this is a very small effect though, amounting to less than 0.2% change in solar insolation, equivalent to a radiative forcing of ~0.45 W/m2 (assuming present-day albedo). This is much less than the total anthropogenic forcing over the 20th century.

  69. Bruce of Newcastle

    Stephan – TSI is only a small part. The Sun modulates cloud cover, which is the main forcing of temperature.

    When you take the total solar forcing it is 5-6 times the forcing of TSI alone. You can get this from the correlation with solar cycle length data, which holds over centuries of the data available to us.

    Read off from the regression line the respective temperature anomalies for SC 13 (11.9 yrs) and SC 22 (9.7 yrs) and you’ll see the temperature swing due to the sun is about 0.45 C, just what Prof Rao found from his GCR analysis. Those two solar cycles are the ones which ended just before the end dates of the IPCC favoured century which is 1906-2005.

    Several other empirical proxies can be used to get the same general magnitude. The Sun and the oceans did most of the temperature rise. CO2 only did a small amount, not enough for its sensitivity to be at all dangerous.

Comments are closed.