Solar Minimum: The Sun Is Getting Quieter and Is Displaying Some Very Weird Behavior
Several people in the Gulch hve mentioned this, and a whole slew of You Tubers have videos on it going back a few years. I gues the question is: does it impact climate change? Is the increased variations in solar output to blame, maybe there has been a small increase in output not identified? These are all things I would like to see addressed before I would jump in on the greenhouse bandwagon, along with a complete explanation of why, if CO2 is climing to huge levels, are certain nations allowed to destroy some of the great CO2 absorption machines (like the Amazon rainforest) with nothng being said, no action taken, but "evil" man always the culprit for producing it? Maybe I am too simplistic but...
The Amazon rain forest does not create OX nor CO2...it's a wash; breathing in CO2, exhaling OX- daytime and just the opposite during the night. CO2 hangs around during winter and is not in demand due to most of the green plant and tree life being dormant...and again, just the opposite during spring, summer and early fall.
News Flash...most of our oxygen comes from the interactions of cosmic radiation and our ionosphere and perhaps other process we haven't discovered yet.
NOAA and NASA has been caught tampering with the temperature data; not to mention years of installing temperature recording equipment in the hottest parts of cities...still, the original data and satellite data can be found and it all averages out to net cooling.
Grand Solar Minimums are noted for mostly cold cloudy weather, warmer or the same as usual in some areas but the worst of all things: Unpredictability of temperature in relation to growing food.
Did you know we lost 40% of our wheat crops here in the USA due to freak snow storms in May this year. Did you know that most of Europe has lost their Fruit crops in the past two years due to freak cold, ice and snow storms.
Yes, it's the Sun Silly and has been on a reliable Cycle for millions of years. Start with the Dalton and Maunder-(GSM) minimums and work your way back, 400 years at a time.
Remember, at the onset of a GSM, Europe usually gets it first and they have already.
What confounds us in the present onset of another GSM is our weakening magnetic shielding and rapidly moving magnetic poles; we have no idea how this will, if at all, effect the coming climate change...But the one thing we do know is...it's not your fault!
When thinking of climate, always remember that Environment, weather and climate are different things. Climate is weather and temperature patterns over a long period of time of which the condition of our Environment plays absolutely No role what so ever.
Just like Los Vegas...what happens in the troposphere...stays in the troposphere.
snip:
July 4, 2017 : Coldest July Temperature Ever Recorded In The Northern Hemisphere
Climate experts immediately responded to the record cold by saying Greenland is melting faster than expected at -33C.
In fact, Greenland has gained a near record amount of ice this year, and the ice is melting very slowly.
https://www.ecowatch.com/arctic-clima...
Funny how they spin that one.
This will occur during an unusually hot spring afternoon on April 1, 2018, at precisely 4:41 PM ET, according to government funded science.
Never mind the Trump hater who wrote the sentiment I swiped.
The reality is that whatever takes with the workings (and output) of the sun will be definition have an impact on the planets surrounding it. The question is to what extent. As for the most recent "drop" in the temperature of the surface of the sun, we have no idea of what is causing it however, if you look at the various readings (and images) taken from the SOHO satellite, it is striking in the shear size of the "hole".
Solar flares also have an impact (good and bad) and now after a number of years, scientists are predicting (based on studies) that the sun will be going into what amounts to a dormant period that will be much quieter than previous solar cycles. Again, this is not man-made and will have impacts for probably the next 10 or 15 years at least.
Lastly, as was stated previously, even the "rant" that carbon dioxide (man-made of course) was the "root" cause of "Global Warming", now as of a week or so ago, Russian and French scientists working together in the Antarctic have take 10,000 year old core samples of the ice and what do they find? That contrary to "conventional wisdom" of today's "climatologists" global warming was preceded (not a result of) carbon dioxide. The samples do not lie. This basically turns the "hypothesis" the Global warming crowd has been using on its head.
So, the point here is that good science takes all data, uses hypothesis first, builds the appropriate protocols, tests results of those experiments and uses "honest" outcomes with all data to continue to search for the Truth - Empiricism not "pop" science!
For these reasons all of the demonizing those who have not signed onto the man-made, global warming bandwagon should return to good science. With that being said, there is definitely climate change afoot (has been for millions of years) however spending trillions of dollars in the wrong place accomplishes absolutely nothing!
For what its worth!
It's actually quite nefarious. The purpose of AGW is the destruction of capitalism and the global redistribution of wealth. Applying reason is only really appropriate when you're talking to someone rational and this criteria doesn't apply to the AGW true believers.
http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/co2/vost...
(by the way a Gulcher AJAshinoff,wrote a book using this as his starting point called "The Vostok Revelation")
https://www.nature.com/nature/journal...
http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/co2/ice_...
Just search for "French Russian Ice core research"
We can look back in history and find a lot of bizarre stuff going on with humanity and humanoids during these events.
The biggest problems are food production which has played a major role in the collapse of civilizations and societies in the past.
Which brings about the reality ignored and promulgated by the left as a distraction from that reality.
And you know how I eschew obfuscation.
Anyone who even mentions Landscheidt's name apparently gets held up for ridicule, for supporting ideas that are mere astrology.
Is anyone here an expert on mechanics? I mean the stuff you learn by studying Goldstein or Lanczos, not taking apart your car's engine.
Oh, and if you are not any sort of expert, this educational film might be of help: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yyzAO...
And https://home.cern/about/experiments/cloud
Increase in Cosmic rays 15% 2015-2017 this year expected to increase 17%.
More clouds increases the Albedo effect.
Albedo is the fraction of solar energy (shortwave radiation) reflected from the Earth back into space. It is a measure of the reflectivity of the earth's surface. Ice, especially with snow on top of it, has a high albedo: most sunlight hitting the surface bounces back towards space.
Cloudy during the day cooler, cloudy at night doesn't cool down as much as clear skies
allows all the heat to escape most noticeable in winter.
The Maunder Minimum, also known as the "prolonged sunspot minimum", is the name used for the period starting in about 1645 and continuing to about 1715 when sunspots became exceedingly rare, as noted by solar observers of the time.
The term was introduced after John A. Eddy[1] published a landmark 1976 paper in Science.[2] Astronomers before Eddy had also named the period after the solar astronomers Annie Russell Maunder (1868–1947) and E. Walter Maunder (1851–1928), who studied how sunspot latitudes changed with time.[3] The period which the husband and wife team examined included the second half of the 17th century.
Two papers were published in Edward Maunder's name in 1890[4] and 1894,[5] and he cited earlier papers written by Gustav Spörer.[6] Because Annie Maunder had not received a university degree (due to restrictions at the time), her contribution was not then publicly recognized.[7]
Spörer noted that, during a 28-year period (1672–1699) within the Maunder Minimum, observations revealed fewer than 50 sunspots. This contrasts with the typical 40,000–50,000 sunspots seen in modern times.[8]
Like the Dalton Minimum and Spörer Minimum, the Maunder Minimum coincided with a period of lower-than-average European temperatures.
Ref:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maunder...
Changes in sunspot activity go with changes in the amount and wavelength of radiation emitted by the sun.
The atmosphere of our planet contains water vapor.
Increased radiation in certain wavelengths causes water vapor to condense into clouds.
Clouds reflect more heat than does a clear atmosphere so the planet cools.
Heat not reflected reaches the surface and dissipates more slowly as cloud cover is a
physical barrier to convection.
More clouds thus cause lower temperature on the planet, and the daily temperature range is lower.
( All this is standard uncontroversial long standing stuff in meteorology and
makes no recourse to fallacious so-called 'greenhouse effects'. )
Regarding the point about deforestation, I'm unclear how much it affects the carbon cycle because I imagine much of the carbon captured gets released eventually. Intuitively, though, it's a doubly whammy of increasingly global warming and hasting the current mass-extinction event. I would guess the decreased bio-diversity would be more costly than its contribution to climate change, but that's a wild guess.
Here is an interesting point CG; The sun is still producing sunspots and they still flair...just not in our direction. The position of Jupiter and Saturn seem to play a role in this cycle, perhaps together, providing a stronger electromagnetic pull upon the sun than our relationship with the sun.
I am thinking that these events are instigated by an occultation of normal relationships or the addition of a new or re-occurring cyclical relationships as we make our way around the Milky way in procession. It's likely that because everything is moving at different rates dependent upon position in the galaxy our system aligns with different entities from time to time.
I actually do not even understand the relationship between cosmic rays, solar output, and sunspots. I just know sunspots have a huge effect on radio propagation. 10 meters easily supports worldwide communication during a sunspot peaks and is for local communication only during the troughs.
The solar wind blocks cosmic rays, less solar activity, less solar wind, more cosmic rays. If the hypothesis is correct, that makes more clouds, increasing reflectivity. Makes for cooler planet -- except possibly at the poles which would warm because clouds are less reflective than snow.
He even speculates that the orbit of the solar system around the galaxy causes it to dip above and below the galactic plane and as we pass through the plane we get increased cosmic rays and periodic ice ages. Very speculative but interesting. I haven't seen any good theories as to why we have periodic ice ages.
Is science really that politicized? Is there some other political "police" who represent everyone who wants to live an industrial lifestyle and wishes the anthropogenic portion of global warming were insignificant or zero? Do you suspect there is similar politics in other areas, like studying the merits of aggressively treating high cholesterol and high blood pressure. It would hurt drug companies if it were found a third factor causes those conditions so just treating the symptom has less effect. Am I naive to think most scientists would love to find something that upends the current understanding?
"more clouds, increasing reflectivity. Makes for cooler planet "
I thought the increased albedo was offset by decreased radiational cooling at night, so more clouds meant a step closer to Venus-like conditions.
" I haven't seen any good theories as to why we have periodic ice ages."
That's surprising. I thought it was because precession changed the phase difference between the summer solstice in the hemisphere with most land mass (currently the Northern) and the earth's orbit's perigee. I figured that was simplistic but the basically the primary cause. If scientists don't have a good model for the ice ages or the glacial maxima/minima with the current ice age, that's surprising.