|
Post by cuttydyer on Sept 13, 2013 7:40:14 GMT
Pretty decent weather on the 15-day forecast for London, UK, max/min temps/precipitation: So N°1, when's this UK cooling trend going to reverse and the promised Mediterranean climate going to arrive? - approximate date(s) please. Data source: www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadcet/data/download.htmlI need to know, so I can start to plan the conversion of my orchard from apple to olive trees...
|
|
|
Post by cuttydyer on Sept 13, 2013 8:47:20 GMT
The BBC's Paul Hudson reports: Rare solar cycle has cold implications for UK climateNASA last week confirmed their prediction that the current solar cycle 24 is likely to be the weakest since 1906. Intriguingly, the current solar cycle shows a striking similarity with solar cycle 5 which was also very weak, with the same double peak as the current cycle, and ran from approximately the mid 1790s to around 1810. Solar cycle 6 was weaker still and stretched from around 1810 to the early 1820s. Solar cycles 5 and 6 were so unusual that they were named the Dalton solar minimum after meteorologist John Dalton and coincided with a period of increasingly cold winters and poor summers. This type of climate is a result of a jet stream that’s positioned further south than normal – caused, it’s thought at least in part, by the behaviour of the sun. The mechanism as to why weak solar cycles may affect the position of the jet stream is poorly understood. But a more southerly positioned jet stream is the reason why the UK has recently seen a return of cold snowy winters and a run of poor summers. Should solar activity continue to mirror that which was observed from 1795 to 1820 then it’s possible that our weather could be similar too. The Central England Temperature (CET) record, which began in 1659, gives an intriguing insight into what might lie ahead. The period was littered with examples of cold, wet summers and cold winters – indeed the decade from 1810-1819 was the coldest since the 1690s. Link: www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/paulhudson/posts/Rare-solar-cycle-has-cold-implications-for-UK-climate
|
|
|
Post by numerouno on Sept 13, 2013 10:35:34 GMT
OK, cuttydyer, the deal and your thesis is here: your task is to search historical statistical connections of jet stream positions and solar cycles ...
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Sept 13, 2013 10:41:10 GMT
The BBC's Paul Hudson reports: Rare solar cycle has cold implications for UK climateNASA last week confirmed their prediction that the current solar cycle 24 is likely to be the weakest since 1906. Intriguingly, the current solar cycle shows a striking similarity with solar cycle 5 which was also very weak, with the same double peak as the current cycle, and ran from approximately the mid 1790s to around 1810. Solar cycle 6 was weaker still and stretched from around 1810 to the early 1820s. Solar cycles 5 and 6 were so unusual that they were named the Dalton solar minimum after meteorologist John Dalton and coincided with a period of increasingly cold winters and poor summers. This type of climate is a result of a jet stream that’s positioned further south than normal – caused, it’s thought at least in part, by the behaviour of the sun. The mechanism as to why weak solar cycles may affect the position of the jet stream is poorly understood. But a more southerly positioned jet stream is the reason why the UK has recently seen a return of cold snowy winters and a run of poor summers. Should solar activity continue to mirror that which was observed from 1795 to 1820 then it’s possible that our weather could be similar too. The Central England Temperature (CET) record, which began in 1659, gives an intriguing insight into what might lie ahead. The period was littered with examples of cold, wet summers and cold winters – indeed the decade from 1810-1819 was the coldest since the 1690s. Link: www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/paulhudson/posts/Rare-solar-cycle-has-cold-implications-for-UK-climateGood post Cuttydyer, It's more than a fair bet that global cooling is on the way. It will certainly impact all of Europe, the UK, and the entire northern hemisphere. The Sun's weaker activity is a sure sign of what's to come climate-wise. The problem for those who bought into the falsity of 'man-made global warming' means hard times ahead as global cooling is far worse than global warming could ever be. This winter is looking very snowy for Europe as well, very wet, then very cold. It's a good idea to stock up for this winter, which is a kind of anomalous winter from the astronomic signals I've calculated.
|
|
|
Post by numerouno on Sept 13, 2013 11:30:51 GMT
This winter is looking very snowy for Europe as well, very wet, then very cold. It's a good idea to stock up for this winter, which is a kind of anomalous winter from the astronomic signals I've calculated.
I'm afraid your faint astronomic signals have been compromised by all that handset traffic.
|
|
|
Post by dontgetoutmuch on Sept 13, 2013 13:49:20 GMT
NASA last week confirmed their prediction that the current solar cycle 24 is likely to be the weakest since 1906. Nasa ORIGINALLY predicted no such thing, as a matter of fact, NASA predicted a very high cycle 24. Nasa went on record in 2008 predicting a solar max of 140 +/- 20. With the solar max occurring in 2011. Nasa's original prediction, has changed many, many times. They actively change their "prediction" every time real world data proves them wrong, which for the past 5 years or so has been on average of once every three months. I don't think you can call it a prediction when you continually change a wrong "prediction" to fit reality. The fact that Nasa is actually starting to "predict" a low cycle 24 means to me they they think that current low solar activity will continue a long drop to the next solar minimum. Hmmm, since Nasa has been so consistently wrong I'm guessing that it must be time for the southern hemisphere of the sun to rev up...
|
|
|
Post by cuttydyer on Sept 13, 2013 14:03:51 GMT
NASA last week confirmed their prediction that the current solar cycle 24 is likely to be the weakest since 1906. Nasa ORIGINALLY predicted no such thing, as a matter of fact, NASA predicted a very high cycle 24. Nasa went on record in 2008 predicting a solar max of 140 +/- 20. With the solar max occurring in 2011. Nasa's original prediction, has changed many, many times. They actively change their "prediction" every time real world data proves them wrong, which for the past 5 years or so has been on average of once every three months. I don't think you can call it a prediction when you continually change a wrong "prediction" to fit reality. The fact that Nasa is actually starting to "predict" a low cycle 24 means to me they they think that current low solar activity will continue a long drop to the next solar minimum. Hmmm, since Nasa has been so consistently wrong I'm guessing that it must be time for the southern hemisphere of the sun to rev up... Yep, here's NASA's original 2006 prediction: "Most compelling of all, believes Hathaway, is the work of Mausumi Dikpati and colleagues at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) in Boulder, Colorado. "They have combined observations of the sun’s 'Great Conveyor Belt' with a sophisticated computer model of the sun’s inner dynamo to produce a physics-based prediction of the next solar cycle." In short, it's going to be intense." Link: science1.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2006/21dec_cycle24/ Cycle 24 to date : I think the above demonstrates that clever people with "sophisticated computer models" don't always get things right.
|
|
|
Post by dontgetoutmuch on Sept 13, 2013 15:04:26 GMT
Cuttydyer,
Thanks for digging that up, but your second graph is a little off. The actual prediction isn't centered on reality, it should be moved to the left, with the run up beginning in in 2008, and the peak in 2011. Nasa's magnitude AND timing were off.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Sept 13, 2013 16:08:35 GMT
"I think the above demonstrates that clever people with "sophisticated computer models" don't always get things right."
Should be corrected to "seldom" get things right. And there is nothing to be ashamed about that, as it shows the model has gaping holes in it that need to be addressed.
Just as GCM's have gaping holes in them. At least they are trying, but with the emphasis on CO2, if continued, will continue to show the GCM's are just flat out wrong again and again.
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Sept 13, 2013 18:05:20 GMT
"I think the above demonstrates that clever people with "sophisticated computer models" don't always get things right." Should be corrected to "seldom" get things right. And there is nothing to be ashamed about that, as it shows the model has gaping holes in it that need to be addressed. Just as GCM's have gaping holes in them. At least they are trying, but with the emphasis on CO2, if continued, will continue to show the GCM's are just flat out wrong again and again. Typical. Teach a kid some skills and put him in control of some the world's most powerful computers he is going to think he owns the world. Now F-16 fighter pilots really do but its a world apart from "F16 Multirole Fighter Game"
|
|
|
Post by douglavers on Sept 14, 2013 6:41:34 GMT
Looking at the main Solar Cycle site, there appears to be only two tiny sunspots visible.
As a complete amateur, this strikes me as astonishing for this point in the solar cycle.
I think most high latitude governments should be really worried.
No doubt, if a fierce cooling trend develops they will express great surprise and shock.
|
|
|
Post by numerouno on Sept 14, 2013 14:46:42 GMT
Looking at the main Solar Cycle site, there appears to be only two tiny sunspots visible. As a complete amateur, this strikes me as astonishing for this point in the solar cycle. I think most high latitude governments should be really worried. No doubt, if a fierce cooling trend develops they will express great surprise and shock. The "high latitude governments" are not concerned in the least. Why should they be?
|
|
|
Post by dontgetoutmuch on Sept 14, 2013 20:18:04 GMT
Looking at the main Solar Cycle site, there appears to be only two tiny sunspots visible. As a complete amateur, this strikes me as astonishing for this point in the solar cycle. I think most high latitude governments should be really worried. No doubt, if a fierce cooling trend develops they will express great surprise and shock. The "high latitude governments" are not concerned in the least. Why should they be? Well Numerouno, Some people find the CAGW thing to be pure fraud. Those folks looks at the damage done to climate science research by Gore, Mann, Jones, Hansen, Briffa, Trenberth, Stieg and company to be a little worrisome. The CAGW fraud is out of the bag, you cannot argue with that, sure the Team will ride the gravy train for a few more years, but the useful idiots are starting to go silent, and one or two of the folks riding the gravy train are punching out. The thought has occurred to more than one person that in spite of the "adjustments" to the temperature record and the padding of sunspot numbers that the sun is going quiet, and cooling may be in Earths' future. Today for example... A daily SSN of 40?!? Really!?! Looks a lot like an 11 to me... Everyone knows the CAGW folks are lying, the new question is by how much? Have their shenanigans disguised the beginning of a new Little Ice Age? There is some correlation with past grand solar minimums and periods of cool weather here on Earth. Yes I know that correlation is not causation, and a mechanism has not been identified that, but the Brits and Germans are looking at real problems keeping the lights on in a couple of years without severe winters. Electricity costs my German friends three time what it costs me... And this trend will continue as aging bird choppers begin to fail. I recently moved from Alaska, the area where I lived has officially been cooling for 10 years. Speaking from personal experience, Alaska has cooled much more then the official record reports. I have literally been less then two miles of empty fields from the official thermometer in Anchorage and the temperature I was experiencing was more then 20F colder then the official temperature. Nasa and NOAA are busily trashing the record to support the CAGW agenda. Adjusting the past cooler, and dropping cooling temperature stations, as well as counting pores on the sun that would never have been historically counted. Don't you think it would be prudent for those folks living at high latitudes to be examining the possibility of a cooling world?
|
|
|
Post by nonentropic on Sept 14, 2013 22:59:00 GMT
if its prudent to understand the risks that CAGW presents it must also be prudent to ensure the risk of cooling is understood, that Numero is it in a nutshell.
I personally have very grave reservations about the validity of the claims made by the IPCC and these are reinforced by their vigorous denial that there is any solar factor of consequence. If the IPCC were to take the position that shifting climate is a significant international issue and as such propose to be a center of excellence to study this it would be great. but the ratio of scientists would need to lift to 90% and resorts as venues would disappear for the team.
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Sept 15, 2013 4:20:05 GMT
Looking at the main Solar Cycle site, there appears to be only two tiny sunspots visible. As a complete amateur, this strikes me as astonishing for this point in the solar cycle. I think most high latitude governments should be really worried. No doubt, if a fierce cooling trend develops they will express great surprise and shock. Well, that's what remains to be seen Doug, however, other than 'great surprise and shock' at a fierce cooling trend, what will be most evident is the dire implications from not preparing for global cooling. And that's what I've been warning about for years. It is far easier to make preparations for global cooling and have it not arrive, than to assume that global warming will be with the world 'forever' and be wrong. And I am saying, and forecasting, that the assumption and predictions of the world warming over many more decades is outright wrong. We already are seeing trending to cooling, and that trend will continue, even as we wane from solar-forced global warming to solar-forced global cooling. According to my climate forecast, we will officially be in a state of global cooling by mid-December 2017 and that state will last approximately 36 years. That means that the decades of the 2020s, 2030s and 2040s will have the entire globe impacted by global cooling. We have been seeing the trending toward global cooling take place. For instance, Arctic Sea Ice averaged 2.35 million square miles in August 2013, as compared to the low point of 1.32 million square miles recorded on Sept. 16, 2012, according to the National Snow and Ice Data Center. A chart published Sept. 8 by NSIDC shows the dramatic rise this year, putting total ice cover within two standard deviations of the 30-year average. The NASA satellite images of the arctic sea ice from August 2012 to August 2013 show signs of the trending. Noting the year over year surge, one scientist even argued that "global cooling" was here; however, it's not here just yet, according to my forecast. We still have four (4) years to go before it will be official, but we are seeing these climate trends toward the new climate regime of global cooling, such as what is presently happening in the arctic and antarctic. Still, it is basically too late for all countries to prepare since the 'man-made global warming' proponents wasted over two decades, along with valuable resources, and all that precious time cannot be got back either. It really is a crime to say the least. What they will discover, certainly by the early 2020s, is that the Earth will have entered a new climate regime: Global Cooling, and that will be that. Countries and populations that did not prepare will suffer, as global cooling is certainly no joking matter, and will make major and very serious impacts on the weather, on food production, on just about every facet of life. And global cooling will stay around too, for 36 years in my forecast. That means that it will not be until the year 2053 that the world emerges fully out of the global cooling climate regime.
|
|