Solar Minimum 2009, Global Cooling and the Record Breaking Winter

Cassandra Syndrome

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 23, 2009
Messages
16,885
Surely the laws of probability would dictate that as the median and mean temperatures rise than so to the rise in extreme range? We should be having record breaking temperatures. Why hasn't Death Valley recorded a record in the past 30 years for example if the globe has been warming?

Also is there a possibility that these temperature recording can be skewed by urbanisation and how heat conducts in these circumstances? For example Manchester Airport temperature readings have effected by the expansion of that airport.

I want to avoid the Carbon Dioxide issue in this thread, because it is too political. (please don't edit that line alone for a reply). The effect of Carbon Taxes and Cap and Trade as a means of cutting Carbon is having an negative effect on the real economy. Emission Trading Scheme is another form of Derivative. Yes I want renewable, cheap energy. But the transition to this is the issue that should be the highest priority. The transition to renewable energy in itself involves Carbon. The Capital items and the means of producing these items involves us using Carbon.

As Ibis pointed out to me before small amounts of poisonous gas in the atmosphere can have a poisonous effect on the ecosystem, so on this point I take Carbon Dioxide seriously. If we continue exploding population of ourselves and livestock between burning fossil fuels and excessive respiration there could hit a critical mass of CO2 that could set off an extinction level event. It could be 50 years, 200 years 1000 years who knows.

Its the politics of climate change that is hard to swallow. It is clear to see that the Sun is the primary driver behind climate change. We can't ignore this fact. Its like telling teenagers all drugs kill you. They smoke a bit of cannibis someday, oh thats ok, the next thing they think well if cannibis didn't kill me, sure Heroin must be ok as well. So if people are being deceived about CO2 being involved in climate change and they work this out, they could think well there is nothing wrong with CO2 full stop.

Rather than going mental about cutting emissions in the next 20 years, the whole focus should be on converting to renewable energy. Practically everything around us is made of oil or oil has been involved in the making of it. If we are going to go down the road of complete energy from renewable energy we are going to have to use a lot of Carbon to get there.

We have time though. At 381ppm, the level is not near critical mass.

The short term hysteria of man made climate change looks extremely outlandish now. The correlation with solar activity is too physical evident. The sun has dimmed and we are having cold winters, very little heatwaves and a dramatic decrease in the Atlantic hurricane season.
 


SAT

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 15, 2009
Messages
9,521
Er yes. You see, if every day in a year were 1 degree hotter than the corresponding day the previous year, then the year will be, you know, 1 degree hotter on average. If it's 1.1 degree hotter for 100 days, and 5 degrees colder for 20, those balance out - you don't need a heatwave to correspond to the cold spell. If it's 1.1 degrees warmer in the Southern Hemisphere, and 1 degree cooler in the North, then it's 0.1 degree warmer globally. So you need to look at the whole surface of the Earth, over the whole year, to get a global average temperature.

Do you really not get this? You can do it pretty easily in Excel.
Perhaps you need to go and read up on the nature of heat. You should pay particular attention to the distinguishing characteristics of temperature and heat content.

You will find temperatures from land based stations and surface ocean readings (even if they weren't being fiddled) tell us nothing about the overall heat content of the Earth's climate system. Rising land and surface ocean temperatures could just as likely be due to cooling ocean's losing heat to the atmosphere as to the oceans warming (and thus the Earth's overall heat content rising).

The Argo sea buoy data shows since it's deployment in 2002 that the former is the more likely scenario with the deeper oceans losing substantial amounts of heat energy.
 
Last edited:

Malbekh

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
3,012
I hope this thread is being peer reviewed.....

I used to be on the fence with global warming with my feet dangling in the AGW swimming pool. Based on some posters on this site and the recent slew of damaging corrections with the IPCC I have my feet dangling in the anti-AGW pool.

The current cold snap however, has nothing to do with either camp and all to do with the location of the jet stream over the last couple of months, meaning that some areas were colder and some areas were warmer than normal.

What concerns me is that the last three summers have been absolutely terrible, and I can't recall ever experiencing that three years in a row. If it happens again this year, in conjunction with the abnormalities we have had with temperature and rainfall, the only conclusion is that we must be in some state of flux that may result in permanent change.

I seem to recall that the tipping point to ice age conditions in Ireland were over a very short period of time, like 10 years, according to samples taken from some lake in the west. I'm not saying that we are talking about a new ice age here, I'm just saying that we are having a persistent series of unusual weather patterns, and their sustained nature indicates to me that something is afoot.
 

goosebump

Well-known member
Joined
May 23, 2008
Messages
4,940
What concerns me is that the last three summers have been absolutely terrible, and I can't recall ever experiencing that three years in a row. If it happens again this year, in conjunction with the abnormalities we have had with temperature and rainfall, the only conclusion is that we must be in some state of flux that may result in permanent change.
Actually, arriving at your conclusions based on 3 Irish summers isn't very scientific.

This stuff is:

Logicalscience.com - The Consensus On Global Warming/Climate Change: From Science to Industry & Religion
 

ibis

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 12, 2005
Messages
12,293
Surely the laws of probability would dictate that as the median and mean temperatures rise than so to the rise in extreme range? We should be having record breaking temperatures. Why hasn't Death Valley recorded a record in the past 30 years for example if the globe has been warming?
What like these? Seriously though, record-breaking temperatures needn't follow the rising temperature curve - we're talking about a rise of 1 degree since 1880.

Also is there a possibility that these temperature recording can be skewed by urbanisation and how heat conducts in these circumstances? For example Manchester Airport temperature readings have effected by the expansion of that airport.
That has been studied repeatedly:

the analysis of temperature rise associated with global warming (by NASA or the NOAA or the Hadley Centre in the UK, and so on) takes the urban heat effect into account, by either (i) ignoring all urban temperature data sets, or (ii) correcting urban data sets by comparison with surrounding rural data.

I want to avoid the Carbon Dioxide issue in this thread, because it is too political. (please don't edit that line alone for a reply). The effect of Carbon Taxes and Cap and Trade as a means of cutting Carbon is having an negative effect on the real economy. Emission Trading Scheme is another form of Derivative. Yes I want renewable, cheap energy. But the transition to this is the issue that should be the highest priority. The transition to renewable energy in itself involves Carbon. The Capital items and the means of producing these items involves us using Carbon.

As Ibis pointed out to me before small amounts of poisonous gas in the atmosphere can have a poisonous effect on the ecosystem, so on this point I take Carbon Dioxide seriously. If we continue exploding population of ourselves and livestock between burning fossil fuels and excessive respiration there could hit a critical mass of CO2 that could set off an extinction level event. It could be 50 years, 200 years 1000 years who knows.

Its the politics of climate change that is hard to swallow. It is clear to see that the Sun is the primary driver behind climate change. We can't ignore this fact. Its like telling teenagers all drugs kill you. They smoke a bit of cannibis someday, oh thats ok, the next thing they think well if cannibis didn't kill me, sure Heroin must be ok as well. So if people are being deceived about CO2 being involved in climate change and they work this out, they could think well there is nothing wrong with CO2 full stop.

Rather than going mental about cutting emissions in the next 20 years, the whole focus should be on converting to renewable energy. Practically everything around us is made of oil or oil has been involved in the making of it. If we are going to go down the road of complete energy from renewable energy we are going to have to use a lot of Carbon to get there.

We have time though. At 381ppm, the level is not near critical mass.
I was trying to point out to you that small amounts of gases in the atmosphere are not negligible by virtue merely of their low concentrations. The effect of CO2 in warming at low concentrations is straightforward, measured, and cannot be set aside simply because you can't see it happening.

The short term hysteria of man made climate change looks extremely outlandish now. The correlation with solar activity is too physical evident. The sun has dimmed and we are having cold winters, very little heatwaves and a dramatic decrease in the Atlantic hurricane season.
The facts don't correlate with that hypothesis at all, something which you seem unable to take on board. No cooling is happening:



January 2010 hasn't been cold on a global scale - it's been warm:

 
Last edited:

ibis

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 12, 2005
Messages
12,293
Here's the supposed correlation between temperature and solar activity that CS, as well as several other local skeptics, are currently hanging their hats on:



Up to 1975, there's a reasonable correlation. Since 1975, there isn't. To claim that solar activity is what currently drives temperature changes involves completely ignoring this fact.
 

Malbekh

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
3,012
Actually, arriving at your conclusions based on 3 Irish summers isn't very scientific.

This stuff is:

Logicalscience.com - The Consensus On Global Warming/Climate Change: From Science to Industry & Religion
Sorry goosebump, but the bottom line is people can show me all the graphs, diagrams, scientists and plethora of 'facts' that they like. In the meantime, it's been bloody freezing for two months and the weather for the last three summers was shocking.

I know it's only weather. But only weather is what concerns me, not endless debates on which way round the graphs should be.....
 

ibis

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 12, 2005
Messages
12,293
Sorry goosebump, but the bottom line is people can show me all the graphs, diagrams, scientists and plethora of 'facts' that they like. In the meantime, it's been bloody freezing for two months and the weather for the last three summers was shocking.

I know it's only weather. But only weather is what concerns me, not endless debates on which way round the graphs should be.....
I'd imagine you're not unusual in that - the cold spell in Europe and the US probably had as much impact on public perception of "global warming" as any of the climate opposition PR.

However, goosebump is quite right. If you base your view of climate change on what is fundamentally anecdotal evidence, you're going to be swinging back and forth like...well, like a weathercock.
 

ibis

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 12, 2005
Messages
12,293
So what anecdotal evidence was predicted to show AGW? an increase in hurricanes? right.

In addition to anecdotal evidence which shows cooling there is also the scientific evidence which explains why. 1. The solar minimum, 2. An increase in global cloud cover.

'Cloud ship' scheme to deflect the sun's rays is favourite to cut global warming - Telegraph
Sigh. Anecdotal evidence doesn't "show" global cooling - it says "ooh, it was cold round my way". Anecdotal evidence as to how cold it is is completely irrelevant if you have a thermometer record. The thermometer records show no cooling.

Also, perhaps you should read the article you linked to, because it isn't an article saying there has been an increase in cloud cover.
 

Cassandra Syndrome

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 23, 2009
Messages
16,885

brigg

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 8, 2009
Messages
498
"the thermometer records show no cooling"? all time records have been broken this year.
BBC News - Scotland records coldest winter
The weather has been stuck in a rut, giving Scotland & Ireland an unusually prolonged spell of cold weather, and a complete absence of our normal Atlantic southwesterlies.
However, no record minimums were recorded in Scotland this year.
Scotland's record cold temperature of -27.2C was recorded in December 1995, which followed the famous long hot Summer, and a warm Autumn.
Its all about getting the right weather patterns, at the right time of year.
A prolonged spell of easterly winds in Winter will give Ireland freezing conditions, but the exact same set-up in Summer could bring us a scorching heatwave.
 
Last edited:

Cassandra Syndrome

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 23, 2009
Messages
16,885


The above graph of solar activity derives a striking correlation to our climate patterns. During the 2 periods the Maunder and Dalton Solar minimums, there was a "mini Ice age" throughout the world. Notice the cycle in the early 1970s was much lower than the couple before and the ones since. During the 1970s world temperatures dropped. A lot of climate Scientists of that era were warning of the coming ice age. Anyone over 30 can remember how much colder the winter were then. The solar cycle in the 90s was stronger and we notice how our summers and winters were milder. However this particular minimum is the lowest in 100 years and our climate is matching the records set then. Hence the worst snowfalls in 100 years headlines.

How strong will this cycle be? We do not know, but experts do believe that there will be a massive increase in sunspots appearing in the next 2 years. Daily updates here,

SpaceWeather.com -- News and information about meteor showers, solar flares, auroras, and near-Earth asteroids
 

Cassandra Syndrome

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 23, 2009
Messages
16,885
Sorry goosebump, but the bottom line is people can show me all the graphs, diagrams, scientists and plethora of 'facts' that they like. In the meantime, it's been bloody freezing for two months and the weather for the last three summers was shocking.

I know it's only weather. But only weather is what concerns me, not endless debates on which way round the graphs should be.....
+1

Our own personal experiences of weather collectively are as important as the data, which can be skewed. Its the old if the party says 2 + 2 = 5 than 2 + 2 = 5 routine.
 

ibis

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 12, 2005
Messages
12,293
"the thermometer records show no cooling"? all time records have been broken this year.
BBC News - Scotland records coldest winter

FTA we see that scientists are discussing ways of making cloud cover, even suggesting.... "another scheme considered by the Copenhagen consensus centre is one to mimic the effects of volcanic eruptions in shielding the sun's rays with a chemical haze and creating a global cooling effect that can last for over a year"

BTW there has been an increase in cloud cover, hav'nt you noticed yet?
Um, look, neither Scotland nor Ireland are the world. Please read back over the posts dealing with the fact that a cold winter doesn't prevent a year being warmer overall (statistics 101), and that temperature evidence from one particular place doesn't have any real meaning when we're talking about global temperatures.

If you mean that there has been an increase in global cloud cover, perhaps you could provide a reference for the claim?

I couldn't locate data for the red parts on the 80 degrees North of the above map. But here is an article about the weather on the North Pole in January,
Goodness me! Lowest in a whole six years! Since 2004! Well, Watts has to make lemonade, I suppose, if the temperature records hand him lemons.
 

ibis

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 12, 2005
Messages
12,293


The above graph of solar activity derives a striking correlation to our climate patterns. During the 2 periods the Maunder and Dalton Solar minimums, there was a "mini Ice age" throughout the world. Notice the cycle in the early 1970s was much lower than the couple before and the ones since. During the 1970s world temperatures dropped. A lot of climate Scientists of that era were warning of the coming ice age. Anyone over 30 can remember how much colder the winter were then. The solar cycle in the 90s was stronger and we notice how our summers and winters were milder. However this particular minimum is the lowest in 100 years and our climate is matching the records set then. Hence the worst snowfalls in 100 years headlines.

How strong will this cycle be? We do not know, but experts do believe that there will be a massive increase in sunspots appearing in the next 2 years. Daily updates here,

SpaceWeather.com -- News and information about meteor showers, solar flares, auroras, and near-Earth asteroids
It's been pointed out - to you, several times - that that graph only goes up to 2000 because even the authors of it accept that the proposed correlation has broken down. Yet here you are trotting it out again.
 

sharper

Well-known member
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
1,027
+1

Our own personal experiences of weather collectively are as important as the data, which can be skewed. Its the old if the party says 2 + 2 = 5 than 2 + 2 = 5 routine.
Ha!

Our "collective experiences" = hard fact.

Data = something that can be skewed.

You're hilarious Cassandra Syndrome you really are. Not because of your screwy conclusions but the absolutely ridiculous thought processes and justifications you invoke trying to defend them.

I look forward to your posts next time we have a hot summer.
 

Cassandra Syndrome

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 23, 2009
Messages
16,885
It's been pointed out - to you, several times - that that graph only goes up to 2000 because even the authors of it accept that the proposed correlation has broken down. Yet here you are trotting it out again.
No you can see 2010, were the blue line of the solar cycle hits the minimum, the lowest in 100 years. Sunspots are appearing again and another cycle is beginning.

So,

1. Was 2009 / 2010 Solar minimum the lowest in 100 years?

2. Are there a huge number of severe snowstorms being reported that are the worse in 100 years?

3. Did we have only 3 Atlantic Hurricanes in 2009?

4. Was there any heatwaves in the Northern Hemisphere when the Solar minimum commenced from March 2009?
 

SAT

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 15, 2009
Messages
9,521
It's been pointed out - to you, several times - that that graph only goes up to 2000 because even the authors of it accept that the proposed correlation has broken down. Yet here you are trotting it out again.
And it has been pointed out to you repeatedly that the reason it stops at 2000 is because it is based on the 11 year solar cycle average. Perhaps this information was too complicated for you to understand which is why you continue to ignore it in favour of your own personal conspiracy theory. :rolleyes:
 

ibis

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 12, 2005
Messages
12,293
No you can see 2010, were the blue line of the solar cycle hits the minimum, the lowest in 100 years. Sunspots are appearing again and another cycle is beginning.

So,

1. Was 2009 / 2010 Solar minimum the lowest in 100 years?

2. Are there a huge number of severe snowstorms being reported that are the worse in 100 years?

3. Did we have only 3 Atlantic Hurricanes in 2009?

4. Was there any heatwaves in the Northern Hemisphere when the Solar minimum commenced from March 2009?
Was 2009 an abnormally cold year? No, it was very warm. Any sign of a 100-year temperature minimum here?



Argument fail.

Sigh. Here's the solar cycle/temperature correlation from "Surface warming by the solar cycle as revealed by the composite mean difference projection" by Charles D. Camp and Ka Kit Tung (2007):



Nice correlation...only problem is that the temperature line here excludes the warming trend.
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top