Posted on 08/19/2008 10:10:46 AM PDT by Kenny Bunk
An expert from the National Autonomous University of Mexico predicted that the Earth will enter a "Little Ice Age" which will last from 60 to 80 years and may be caused by the decrease in solar activity.
Victor Manuel Velasco Herrera, a researcher at the Institute of Geophysics at UNAM, showcased his theories during an international conference he led at the Centre for Applied Sciences and Technological Development. Velasco, a specialist in remote sensing systems, said that the recent rupture of the Perito Moreno glacier on the border of Chile and Argentina, unusual for having produced a full austral winter, was not due to global warming. He theorizes that the event was caused during a drought by falling water levels in the river, coupled with colder temperatures.
Dr. Velasco described as "erroneous" predictions of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), of a gradual increase in temperature, the so-called global warming. The models and forecasts of the IPCC "are incorrect because they are based solely on mathematical models and do not include, for example, solar activity," said Velasco, who is also a specialist in predictive image processing. "The phenomenon of climate change," he added, "should include both internal and external factors. Internal would include volcanic activity,while external causes include solar activity."
"Curiously, the Sun never has been seen as a cooling agent, but as a cause of warming. It clearly has roles in both cooling and warming," he said.
At present, Velasco holds that the world is going through a transition phase of considerably diminished solar activity, "so that in two years or so, there will be the beginnings of a small ice age that lasts from 60 to 80 years,and the immediate consequence of this" he added, "will be drought."
Analyses by the IPCC concluded that the "Little Ice Age",a cold period that lasted since the beginning of the fourteenth century until the mid-nineteenth century. was a regional phenomena or accentuation of local effects. But Velasco disagrees. He says that, "Current evidence does not support globally synchronous periods of abnormal heat or cold in this timeframe," and that it must have been caused by other factors.
Highlights and Dates
According to Velasco, effects will be clearly observable within in approximately two years. However, in early July, Velasco Herrera said that satellite data indicate it is possible that this period of global cooling may have even already begun as early as 2005.
He has predicted that cooling would fully arrive within 30 or 40 years.
Hopefully it will be recorded. I'd pay good money to see that.
Locks up a lot of water in the ice caps. That water can't fall as rain.
Warming OTOH, frees up water, and increases evaporation from the oceans. It's got rain out somewhere. But changed circulation patterns could mean that it gets drier some places, and a lot wetter in others, but overall it should be wetter, like the old 30s and 40s Science Fiction versions of the Venusian swamps.
The show will be worth the oprice of admission!
(Robt pings hisself to go find the paper - T’was linked from a link from a FR global warming thread about two-three weeks ago.)
“SC23 was about normal (e.g. see http://sidc.oma.be/html/wolfmms.html after a relatively strong 1980 and 1990. The current minimum seems to be ending, see for example http://www.wm7d.net/hamradio/solar/index.shtml where flux seems to (barely) bottom out in July.”
You’re looking at slight fluctuations that probably mean nothing statistically. The Sun is pretty complex. Look at the sunspot numbers reported throughout the Maunder Minimum for instance.
Not a single professional astronomer that I’m aware of has declared Cycle 23 over. The historical criteria for that is more Cycle 24 spots on the Sun than Cycle 23 spots at a given time, which hasn’t happened yet. Please cite any data you have that states otherwise.
Here’s a fairly recent NASA article on the subject:
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2008/11jul_solarcycleupdate.htm
This astronomer seems to be ‘cheering’ for a relatively early Cycle 24, I believe due to earlier predictions he made. Note that he says we’re in the “first standard deviation” for the cycle length. It’s a roughly 69% probability (for a normally distributed variable) for that to be the case. However, we’re now only four months away from making it into the second standard deviation, which will go another 14 months. So, if the current solar minimum continues for about another 18 months, we will have exceeded the second standard deviation, which (again with a normal distribution) only happens 5% of the time (95% of the time a sample will fall within two standard deviations of the mean). That would start to look extremely significant.
Regardless, though, according to one of the leading theories of solar physics (the ‘solar dynamo’ theory) the already long, weak Cycle 23 means an even longer, weaker Cycle 24...which as far as I can tell means significant cooling for 12-15 years at least.
One last data point: in contrast to NOAA and ‘big science’, which continue to predict warm temperatures in line with CAGW dogma, the Farmer’s Almanac is predicting a cold winter:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2065287/posts
I’m going with the Almanac. ;-)
Interesting.
Thanks.
That's rather difficult when there are no spots. It's not unusual to have no spots on the trough, so the only way to know is to extend the sunspot counts forward and backward (i.e. you know it was a trough after you have been through it). But there's another way which is to look at solar flux. Solar flux (at various frequencies measured by Hams and others) is at a minimum at the solar cycle minimum. But as you say there are slight fluctuations that could mean nothing. But my opinion is that the trough was in July and I have no evidence against that yet (and not a lot for it except for the tiny uptick so far in August).
It's all tied to the solar 'conveyor belt' that is mid-equitorial sub-surface plasma currents which drive sunspot creation and magnetic storming. The southern, and to a lesser extent, northern currents have slowed to speeds never seen before.
It'll be "a cold winter" and "colder than last year" for many years into the future.
I used your article for a post in my Daily Global Cooling Watch here: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1969680/posts
(post #400)
Thanks again!
There are a few trees here in Fort Wayne, mostly very small ones, that are changing their color already.
SC23 was very strong - and very slow to “stop”, coming after a 21 and 22 very strong cycles.
I agree, that NASA solar specialist has been “cheering” for a strong, very-very-very fast-rising cycle 24 for a long time.
So far, he has been very,very disappointed, hasn't he?
March 2007 (and some had predicted solar cycle 24 starting even earlier than that! ) was its original “start date” and here we are in mid-August of 2008, with still NO sunspots in sight at all.
My prediction?
Winter 2008-2009 is looking to be another cold one. Temperatures between (now) and the START of solar cycle 24 are going to be very cold - certainly colder than any since the 1980’s - then they will increase a little bit as the 11+ year cycle of solar cycle 24 increases to its maximum. (Originally, solar cycle 24 was to have peaked in 2011 - that WON'T happen, but the peak will come a few years later.) So, about 2013-2016, temperatures will max out, then decline again through the solar cycle 24-solar cycle 25 “minimum (which can't get any l;lower than today's “zero” sunspots - but the solar flux might go down some more!) then rise again a little to the expected “low peak” of solar cycle 25.
So we will have a few very low peaks and even lower valleys (or a complete Maunder Minimum Mini-Ice Age) between now ans 2035.
Now, after 2030? We "might" start heating up again after 2030 - IF (big IF) the AGW extremists are right.
Then again, at about 2035, we are due for the next 70-year solar warming period to begin again, aren't we?
I hope this is a translation problem and that just means that it will not warm as much as usual.
A good book to read is “Unstoppable Global Warming - Every 1,500 Years”, by Fred Singer and Dennis Avery. It talks about cycles of the sun and how they have affected temperature on earth for a million years (or more). Another good one is Climate Confusion” by Roy W. Spencer; it also rips apart the current pagan religion called “man-made global warming”. Both books are available on amazon.com
There was a climatologist on Coast to Coast that was saying the same thing. George Noory had a gentleman on last night that was saying that all the crap about the glaciers shrinking is just not true and not supported by science.
The Colorado winters are cold enough for me already.
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.