Thanks Ernest.
|
Posted on 05/03/2012 7:42:20 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
From: http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/predict.shtml
The current prediction for Sunspot Cycle 24 gives a smoothed sunspot number maximum of about 60 in the Spring of 2013. We are currently over three years into Cycle 24. The current predicted size makes this the smallest sunspot cycle in about 100 years.
The prediction method has been slightly revised. The previous method found a fit for both the amplitude and the starting time of the cycle along with a weighted estimate of the amplitude from precursor predictions (polar fields and geomagnetic activity near cycle minimum). Recent work [see Hathaway Solar Physics; 273, 221 (2011)] indicates that the equatorward drift of the sunspot latitudes as seen in the Butterfly Diagram follows a standard path for all cycles provided the dates are taken relative to a starting time determined by fitting the full cycle. Using data for the current sunspot cycle indicates a starting date of May of 2008. Fixing this date and then finding the cycle amplitude that best fits the sunspot number data yields the current (revised) prediction.
(Excerpt) Read more at wattsupwiththat.com ...
*************************************EXCERPT*******************************************
Samurai says:
You almost have to feel sorry for the poor Warmunistas. Everything was going so well for them until: SC23 turned out to be so weak and now SC24 looks to be the lowest in 100 years.
To make matters worse, CERN was finally allowed to conduct the CLOUD experiment and it turns out GCRs do, in fact, nucleate inorganic compounds, which create increased cloud cover and cooler global temperatures.
I can’t wait for Svensmark peer-pending paper to come out, showing the evidence that +50 nanometer cloud seeds are possible in the Scensmark Effect.
Does anyone have any news approximately when Svensmark paper will be out? TIA.
**************************************EXCERPT*******************************************
Allan MacRae says:
blogoriginator says: May 3, 2012 at 12:45 am
Can anybody tell me what kind of Global Temperature we’re facing in the next ten years?
____________________
History – 2002:
On 1 September 2002, I wrote in an article in the Calgary Herald:
” If solar activity is the main driver of surface temperature [as I believe it is] rather than CO2, we should begin the next cooling period by 2020 to 2030.”
This conclusion was based on decades of study, and a phone call to Dr. Tim Patterson, Carleton University Paleoclimatologist, who had studied natural warming and cooling cycles that he believed were related to the Gleissberg (Wolf) Cycle.
We were also aware of Hathaway’s now-failed prediction of SC24 peaking at Tmax ~160, and the prediction by NASA? that SC25 would be very weak.
At the time, I was (and still am) unsure if the warming and cooling cycle were better related to the PDO than the Gleissberg – If it is the PDO, global cooling could commence sooner, perhaps about now.
____________________
Update – 2012:
Recent information include the much-lower prediction of a Rmax of ~60 for SC24, and recent work, which I have scanned but not studied, on solar impacts on Earth’s climate.
Accordingly, I have little choice but to hold to my 2002 statement – the next natural global cooling period will commence by 2020-2030.
Caveat: It is possible we were “late” in this prediction, and that global cooling has already begun, but it is not yet serious or significant.
Will global cooling become serious and significant? I do not know, but I think this is a very real possibility – there is a significant probability of serious global cooling commencing by 2020-2030, or sooner.
____________________
Implications of Serious Global Cooling:
Serious global cooling could significantly decrease the global grain harvest, which would have major impacts on humanity and the environment.
If this occurs, based on current political realities, humanity will be woefully unprepared. It would, in my opinion, be sensible to start now making cost-effective preparations for this possibility.
These measures would include ensuring that stockpiles of grain are adequate, and accelerating the further development of frost-resistant crops.
Is this an alarmist position? Another misguided application of the “Precautionary Principle”? I suggest not – first, the net costs of my modest proposal are not that great, especially when one considers the huge amount of American corn that is currently being squandered in corn ethanol production. My proposal costs much less than the very costly, inefficient and self-serving “green energy” schemes of the global warming movement, Furthermore, I have no financial interest in promoting climate alarmism, and a sincere interest in reducing the needless suffering of humanity and the resulting destruction of the environment.
*********************************EXCERPT*****************************************
Gerard says:
I still find the predictions of De Jager most accurate and in contrast to Svalgaard he does see an important role for solar fluctuations in the earth’s climate. The recent warming period until 1999 is in his view not unusual given the variations in solar forcing through the last centuries.
De Jager, Duhau, Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestial Physics (2008):
“We find that the system is presently undergoing a transition from the recent Grand Maximum to another regime. This transition started in 2000 and it is expected to end around the maximum of cycle 24 foreseen for 2014, with a maximum sunspot number Rmax= 68+/-17. At that time a period of lower solar activity will start. That period will be one of regular oscillations, as occurred between 1730 and 1923. The first of these oscillations may even turn out to be as strongly negative as around 1810, in which case a short Grand Minimum similar to the Dalton one might develop. This moderate-to-low-activity episode is expected to last for at least one Gleissberg cycle (60-100 years).”
De Jager adapted this expectation in 2010 based on new observations and better interpretations to an Rmax of 55. Also the Grand Minimum is expected to be deeper and Maunder like.
**********************************EXCERPT************************************
Allan MacRae says:
MarkW says: May 3, 2012 at 9:40 am
Allan says: “Serious global cooling could significantly decrease the global grain harvest, which would have major impacts on humanity and the environment.”
Mark says: “There’s plenty of spare (agricultural) capacity should global temperatures turn down.”
OK Mark, let me try to better quantify the question:
1. IF Earth returns to the colder global temperatures of the Maunder Minimum circa 1700, what will be the impact on the global grain harvest?
How long would it take for agriculture to adapt and what grain stores would be required to mitigate shortfalls prior to such adaptation?
What other impacts would matter – e.g. energy supply?
Are we currently capable of managing the impacts of this natural global cooling, or not?
2. Same question for the Dalton Minimum circa 1800.
Does anyone know if this question has been posed and adequately answered amidst all the billions of dollars that have been spent on global warming (aka “climate change”) research?
Because, based on the evidence to date, the catastrophic humanmade global warming crisis does not exist, and natural global cooling, whether moderate or severe, is increasingly probable.
__________
Here is something I just found that I want to remember:
http://ktwop.wordpress.com/2012/03/10/solar-cycles-and-the-landscheidt-minimum/
Hopefully the global temperature decline shall not go much lower then as projected.
BTTT!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
