What’s new on solar energy? Overview of the latest papers on complex topic of sun/climate
(Translated, edited by P Gosselin)
More than three years ago (February 2012) our book Die kalte Sonne (see right) made its debut. In it we described a vast variety of scientific results underpinning the significant impacts of solar activity fluctuations on climate. Leading climate scientists suddenly saw their CO2-dominant view threatened and so they launched an all out onslaught against the solar theories.For one or two of these IPCC-climate warriors the overreaction has since then perhaps even become a bit embarrassing. Over the past years it has become increasingly clear that the role of the sun on climate has long been underestimated. Recent studies show this, and we will point these out at this blog in the days ahead.What’s new on the subject of the sun?In the search for literature the first place to start is at the “Club de Soleil“ website operated by climate scientist Maarten Blaauw of Queen’s University of Belfast. So far in 2015 Blaauw has presented 23 papers – in just the first 8 months alone, and there’s still one third of the year to go. The most recent are two summary papers by David Douglas and Robert Knox appearing in the April 2015 Physics Letters A. The authors found a clear solar signal in ocean temperatures:
Part 1:
The Sun is the climate pacemaker I. Equatorial Pacific Ocean temperatures
Equatorial Pacific Ocean temperature time series data contain segments showing both a phase-locked annual signal and a phase-locked signal of period two years or three years, both locked to the annual solar cycle. Three such segments are observed between 1990 and 2014. It is asserted that these are caused by a solar forcing at a frequency of 1.0 cycle/yr. These periodic features are also found in global climate data (following paper). The analysis makes use of a twelve-month filter that cleanly separates seasonal effects from data. This is found to be significant for understanding the El Niño/La Niña phenomenon.Part 2:
The Sun is the climate pacemaker II. Global ocean temperatures
In part I, equatorial Pacific Ocean temperature index SST3.4 was found to have segments during 1990–2014 showing a phase-locked annual signal and phase-locked signals of 2- or 3-year periods. Phase locking is to an inferred solar forcing of 1.0 cycle/yr. Here the study extends to the global ocean, from surface to 700 and 2000 m. The same phase-locking phenomena are found. The El Niño/La Niña effect diffuses into the world oceans with a delay of about two months.”
There’s a discussion of the two papers at WUWT.
In April 2014 The Hockey Schtick site pointed out that accumulated solar energy is possibly a far better approach for a comparison to the temperature curve. This can be attributed to the climate system’s huge inertia. You can plot here on your own. The result is amazing.
Also very interesting is a Chinese paper from June, 2014, made public by the Science China Press with the following press release:
Has solar activity influence on the Earth’s global warming?
A recent study demonstrates the existence of significant resonance cycles and high correlations between solar activity and the Earth’s averaged surface temperature during centuries. This provides a new clue to reveal the phenomenon of global warming in recent years.
Their work, entitled “Periodicities of solar activity and the surface temperature variation of the Earth and their correlations” was published in CHINESE SCIENCE BULLETIN (In Chinese) 2014 No.14 with the co-corresponding authors of Dr. Zhao Xinhua and Dr. Feng Xueshang from State key laboratory of space weather, CSSAR/NSSC, Chinese Academy of Sciences. It adopts the wavelet analysis technique and cross correlation method to investigate the periodicities of solar activity and the Earth’s temperature as well as their correlations during the past centuries.
Global warming is one of the hottest and most debatable issues at present. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) claimed that the release of the anthropogenic greenhouse gases contributed to 90% or even higher of the observed increase in the global average temperature in the past 50 years. However, the debate on the causes of the global warming never stops. Research shows that the current warming does not exceed the natural fluctuations of climate. The climate models of IPCC seem to underestimate the impact of natural factors on the climate change, while overstate that of human activities. Solar activity is an important ingredient of natural driving forces of climate. Therefore, it is valuable to investigate the influence of solar variability on the Earth’s climate change on long time scales.
This innovative study combines the measured data with those reconstructed to disclose the periodicities of solar activity during centuries and their correlations with the Earth’s temperature. The obtained results demonstrate that solar activity and the Earth’s temperature have significant resonance cycles, and the Earth’s temperature has periodic variations similar to those of solar activity (Figure 1). This study also implies that the “modern maximum” of solar activity agrees well with the recent global warming of the Earth. A significant correlation between them can be found (Figure 2). As pointed out by a peer reviewer, “this work provides a possible explanation for the global warming”.
See the article:
ZHAO X H, FENG X S. Periodicities of solar activity and the surface temperature variation of the Earth and their correlations (in Chinese). Chin Sci Bull (Chin Ver), 2014, 59: 1284, doi: 10.1360/972013-1089 http://csb.
scichina. com:8080/ kxtb/ CN/ abstract/ abstract514043. shtml Science China Press Co., Ltd. (SCP) is a scientific journal publishing company of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS). For 60 years, SCP takes its mission to present to the world the best achievements by Chinese scientists on various fields of natural sciences researches.
In August 2014 Maliniemi and colleagues described in the Journal of Geophysical Research a relationship between winter temperatures of the northern hemisphere and sunspot cycles:
Spatial distribution of Northern Hemisphere winter temperatures during different phases of the solar cycle
Several recent studies have found variability in the Northern Hemisphere winter climate related to different parameters of solar activity. While these results consistently indicate some kind of solar modulation of tropospheric and stratospheric circulation and surface temperature, opinions on the exact mechanism and the solar driver differ. Proposed drivers include, e.g., total solar irradiance (TSI), solar UV radiation, galactic cosmic rays, and magnetospheric energetic particles. While some of these drivers are difficult to distinguish because of their closely similar variation over the solar cycle, other suggested drivers have clear differences in their solar cycle evolution. For example, geomagnetic activity and magnetospheric particle fluxes peak in the declining phase of the sunspot cycle, in difference to TSI and UV radiation which more closely follow sunspots. Using 13 solar cycles (1869–2009), we study winter surface temperatures and North Atlantic oscillation (NAO) during four different phases of the sunspot cycle: minimum, ascending, maximum, and declining phase. We find significant differences in the temperature patterns between the four cycle phases, which indicates a solar cycle modulation of winter surface temperatures. However, the clearest pattern of the temperature anomalies is not found during sunspot maximum or minimum, but during the declining phase, when the temperature pattern closely resembles the pattern found during positive NAO. Moreover, we find the same pattern during the low sunspot activity cycles of 100 years ago, suggesting that the pattern is largely independent of the overall level of solar activity.”
And finally we present a paper by Nicola Scafetta appearing in the Elsevier journal Physica A in November 2014: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications. It is a discussion of a paper by Gil-Alana et al. whereby the authors claimed solar activity fluctuations had no impact on climate. However there is indeed a relationship that is in fact more complex than that assumed by Gil-Alana and colleagues. The Abstract of Scafetta‘s discussion:
Global temperatures and sunspot numbers. Are they related? Yes, but non linearly. A reply to Gil-Alana et al. (2014)
Recently Gil-Alana et al. (2014) compared the sunspot number record and the temperature record and found that they differ: the sunspot number record is characterized by a dominant 11-year cycle while the temperature record appears to be characterized by a “singularity” or “pole” in the spectral density function at the “zero ” frequency. Consequently, they claimed that the two records are characterized by substantially different statistical fractional models and rejected the hypothesis that the Sun influences significantly global temperatures. I will show that: (1) the “singularity” or “pole” in the spectral density function of the global surface temperature at the “zero” frequency does not exist—the observed pattern derives from the post 1880 warming trend of the temperature signal and is a typical misinterpretation that discrete power spectra of non-stationary signals can suggest; (2) appropriate continuous periodograms clarify the issue and also show a signature of the 11-year solar cycle (amplitude ≤0.1°C), which since 1850 has an average period of about 10.4 year, and of many other natural oscillations; (3) the solar signature in the surface temperature record can be recognized only using specific techniques of analysis that take into account non-linearity and filtering of the multiple climate change contributions; (4) the post 1880-year temperature warming trend cannot be compared or studied against the sunspot record and its 11-year cycle, but requires solar proxy models showing short and long scale oscillations plus the contribution of anthropogenic forcings, as done in the literature. Multiple evidences suggest that global temperatures and sunspot numbers are quite related to each other at multiple time scales. Thus, they are characterized by cyclical fractional models. However, solar and climatic indexes are related to each other through complex and non-linear processes. Finally, I show that the prediction of a semi-empirical model for the global surface temperature based on astronomical oscillations and anthropogenic forcing proposed by Scafetta since 2009 has, up to date, been successful.”
Latest book and documentary.
‘The Deliberate Corruption of Climate Science’.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tPzpPXuASY8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tPzpPXuASY8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sO08Hhjes_0
http://www.drtimball.com
It’s absolutely refreshing to see that science is being used to show that humans are not the cause of climate change and that there are natural causes. Please don’t let up as the religion of climate change is hard to stop without data and ideas being shared with the world.
It’s pretty much on its last legs.
Even der Spiegel –
http://www.spiegel.de/wissenschaft/natur/treibhausgase-koennten-antarktis-komplett-abschmelzen-lassen-a-1051234.html
while reporting about an “apocalypse in 2,000 years, models say” paper by the PIK, suddenly and for the first time ever discovers an old journalist custom: Letting a contrarian voice appear in the article.
So – the pro-warmunist system papers try desperately to regain credibility – as they are now losing 10% of readers per year and are pretty much money-losing propaganda outlets at this point, kept alive by their Globalist owners with money infusions, Bertelsmann in this case.
Here is a nice correlation between solar activity and NH temperatures.
https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2015/09/04/re-evaluating-the-role-of-solar-variability-on-the-norhern-hemisphere-temperature-trends-since-the-19th-century/
[…] https://notrickszone.com/2015/09/14/already-23-papers-supporting-sun-as-major-climate-factor-in-2015-… […]
[…] “Already 23 Papers Supporting Sun As Major Climate Factor In 2015 …Burgeoning Evidence No Longer Dismissible!” [link] […]
[…] “Already 23 Papers Supporting Sun As Major Climate Factor In 2015 …Burgeoning Evidence No Longer Dismissible!” [link] […]
It is more likely than not that the earth has already entered a long term cooling trend following the recent temperature peak in the quasi-millennial solar driven periodicity .
The climate models on which the entire Catastrophic Global Warming delusion rests are built without regard to the natural 60 and more importantly 1000 year periodicities so obvious in the temperature record. The modelers approach is simply a scientific disaster and lacks even average commonsense .It is exactly like taking the temperature trend from say Feb – July and projecting it ahead linearly for 20 years or so. They back tune their models for less than 100 years when the relevant time scale is millennial. This is scientific malfeasance on a grand scale. The temperature projections of the IPCC – UK Met office models and all the impact studies which derive from them have no solid foundation in empirical science being derived from inherently useless and specifically structurally flawed models. They provide no basis for the discussion of future climate trends and represent an enormous waste of time and money. As a foundation for Governmental climate and energy policy their forecasts are already seen to be grossly in error and are therefore worse than useless. A new forecasting paradigm needs to be adopted. For forecasts of the timing and extent of the coming cooling based on the natural solar activity cycles – most importantly the millennial cycle – and using the neutron count and 10Be record as the most useful proxy for solar activity check my blog-post at
http://climatesense-norpag.blogspot.com/2014/07/climate-forecasting-methods-and-cooling.html
The most important factor in climate forecasting is where earth is in regard to the quasi- millennial natural solar activity cycle which has a period in the 960 – 1020 year range. For evidence of this cycle see Figs 5-9 at the link above.
From the Figure below it is obvious that the earth is just approaching ,just at or just past a peak in the millennial cycle.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-4nY2wr6L-WY/U81v9OzFkfI/AAAAAAAAATM/NA6lV86_Mx4/s1600/fig5.jpg
Christiansen and Ljungqvist 2012 (Fig 5) Fig 9 here: (http://www.clim-past.net/8/765/2012/cp-8-765-2012.pdf
I suggest that more likely than not the general trends from 1000- 2000 seen in Fig 9 will likely generally repeat from 2000-3000 with the depths of the next LIA at about 2650. The best proxy for solar activity is the neutron monitor count and 10 Be data. My view ,based on the Oulu neutron count – Fig 14 is that the solar activity millennial maximum peaked in Cycle 22 in about 1991. There is a varying lag between the change in the in solar activity and the change in the different temperature metrics. There is a 12 year delay between the neutron peak and the probable millennial cyclic temperature peak seen in the RSS data in 2003. http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/rss/from:1980.1/plot/rss/from:1980.1/to:2003.6/trend/plot/rss/from:2003.6/trend
There has been a cooling temperature trend since then (Usually interpreted as a “pause”) There is likely to be a steepening of the cooling trend in 2017- 2018 corresponding to the very important Ap index break below all recent base values in 2005-6. Fig 13.
The Polar excursions of the last few winters in North America are harbingers of even more extreme winters to come more frequently in the near future.
while some people are telling me, that it is impossible to say anything about an event 10 days ahead, now i am being told that the next 1000 years are utterly clear.
I would like to see, where this prediction foretold us, that 2015 will be the hottest year on record!
sod 20.
Remember 1984 where “he who controls the past controls the present ( and future)”
The GISS and HadCrut data have been steadily “adjusted ” to make their “reality” conform more closely with the model outcomes.
These data sets are now, in the main, unfit for use in climate discussions.
To see where 2015 stands in the real world, the satellite data is the best indicator. In fact considering that we are in the midst of a powerful EL Nino, this years temperatures are surprisingly low when compared to 1998 and 2010. Judge for yourself – See
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-gH99A8_0c6k/VexLL1zC7AI/AAAAAAAAAaQ/T50D6jG3sdw/s1600/trendrss815.png
Well something has been causing the Earth’s climate to slowly change and it sure cannot be CO2. CO2 is not a source of energy so the only way it can affect climate is passively The AGW conjecture is that an increase in CO2 increases the radiant thermal insulation properties of the atmosphere. If that were so then the increase in CO2 over the past 30 years should have caused a noticeable increase in the natural lapse rate in the troposphere but that has not happened. The AGW conjecture depends on a radiant greenhouse effect caused by gases with LWIR absorption bands but the greenhouse effect that keeps the Earth’s surface 33 degrees warmer then it would otherwise be is a convective greenhouse effect caused by gravity which accounts for all 33 degrees and leaves no room for an additional radiant greenhouse effect. So the AGW conjecture is bases on a phenomena that is not observed. Well something has been causing the climate to change over eons and it sure cannot be so called greenhouse gases so phenomena associated with the Sun sounds like the most likely candidate.
This can’t be. How did Big Oil manage to get control over the sun? I suppose with an infusion of more taxpayers money the IPCC will be able to come up with an explanation for their devious plot to destroy planet earth.
Unfortunately, the UN’s IPCC was corrupted from the moment it’s charter was drawn up requiring it to look at anthropogenic global warming. So for all intents and purposes, the science of natural climate variability was generally excluded.
The IPCC AR4 was exposed by the NIPCC’s report “Climate Change Reconsidered” which revealed thousands of peer reviewed studies conveniently ignored by IPCC AR4 editors presumably because such studies were incompatible with the political correct dangerous man-made global war narrative of the IPCC.
The last thing that the political elite want – people who nailed their careers and reputations in support of the IPCC mantra – is to acknowledge these solar activity studies that make a mockery of the man-made carbon dioxide greenhouse effect global warming supposition.
[…] at Pierre Gosselin’s site, NoTricksZone, he’s trumpeting the fact that there are a bunch of new papers showing a solar effect on the […]
Thank you for this interesting post. You already have a link to Willis Eschenbach’s 22SE2015 critique of the first Douglass (sic) and Knox (2015) paper (Equatorial Pacific) at http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/09/22/23-new-papers/
I’d be interested to read Lüning and Vahrenholt’s response to Eschenbach’s critique.
So would I. But for some reason I think his piece has much more to do with the childish desire to grind old axes rather than having an exchange with authors.
and ….
Adolphi, Florian, et al. “Persistent link between solar activity and Greenland climate during the Last Glacial Maximum.” Nature Geoscience (2014)
Barlyaeva, Tatiana V. “External forcing on air–surface temperature: Geographical distribution of sensitive climate zones.” Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics 94 (2013): 81-92
Biktash, L. Z. “Evolution of Dst index, cosmic rays and global temperature during solar cycles 20–23.” Advances in Space Research 54.12 (2014): 2525-2531
Buizert, C., et al. “Precise Interhemispheric Phasing of the Bipolar Seesaw during Abrupt Dansgaard-Oeschger Events.” AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts. Vol. 1. (2014)
Chambers, Don P., Mark A. Merrifield, and R. Steven Nerem. “Is there a 60‐year oscillation in global mean sea level?.” Geophysical Research Letters 39.18 (2012)
Czymzik, Markus. “Mid-to Late Holocene flood reconstruction from two varved sediment profiles of pre-alpine Lake Ammersee (Southern Germany).” (2013)
Knudsen, Mads Faurschou, et al. “Evidence for external forcing of the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation since termination of the Little Ice Age.” Nature communications 5 (2014)
Lam, Mai Mai, Gareth Chisham, and Mervyn P. Freeman. “Solar wind‐driven geopotential height anomalies originate in the Antarctic lower troposphere.” Geophysical Research Letters 41.18 (2014): 6509-6514
Lassen, Knud, and Peter Thejll. Multi-decadal variation of the East Greenland Sea-Ice Extent: AD 1500-2000. DMI, (2005)
Leal-Silva, M. C., and VM Velasco Herrera. “Solar forcing on the ice winter severity index in the western Baltic region.” Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics 89 (2012): 98-109
Mantua, Nathan J., and Steven R. Hare. “The Pacific decadal oscillation.” Journal of oceanography 58.1 (2002): 35-44
National Research Council. The Effects of Solar Variability on Earth’s Climate: A Workshop Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, (2012)
Nieuwenhuijzen, H. “Terrestrial ground temperature variations in relation to solar magnetic variability, including the present Schwabe cycle.” Natural Science 2013 (2013)
Schlesinger, Michael E., and Navin Ramankutty. “An oscillation in the global climate system of period 65-70 years.” Nature 367.6465 (1994): 723-726
Sfîcă, L., and M. Voiculescu. “Possible effects of atmospheric teleconnections and solar variability on tropospheric and stratospheric temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere.” Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics 109 (2014): 7-14
Sha, Longbin, et al. “A diatom-based sea-ice reconstruction for the Vaigat Strait (Disko Bugt, West Greenland) over the last 5000yr.” Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 403 (2014): 66-79
Shaviv, Nir J., Andreas Prokoph, and Ján Veizer. “Is the solar system’s galactic motion imprinted in the phanerozoic climate?.” Scientific reports 4 (2014)
Solheim, Jan-Erik, Kjell Stordahl, and Ole Humlum. “The long sunspot cycle 23 predicts a significant temperature decrease in cycle 24.” Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics 80 (2012): 267-284
Tiwari, R. K., and Rekapalli Rajesh. “Imprint of long‐term solar signal in groundwater recharge fluctuation rates from Northwest China.” Geophysical Research Letters 41.9 (2014): 3103-3109
Todorović, Nedeljko, and Dragana Vujović. “Effect of solar activity on the repetitiveness of some meteorological phenomena.” Advances in Space Research 54.11 (2014): 2430-2440
Vanniere, B., et al. “Orbital changes, variation in solar activity and increased anthropogenic activities: controls on the Holocene flood frequency in the Lake Ledro area, Northern Italy.” Climate of the Past 9.3 (2013): 1193-1209
Zhao, X. H., and X. S. Feng. “Periodicities of solar activity and the surface temperature variation of the Earth and their correlations.” Chin. Sci. Bull.(Chin. Ver.) 59 (2014): 1284-1292
Zhao, X. H., and X. S. Feng. “Correlation between solar activity and the local temperature of Antarctica during the past 11,000 years.” Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics (2014)
Don’t overlook Glassman, JA, “Solar Global Warming”, 3/27/10. Original post with additional climate articles linked here:
//www.rocketscientistsjournal.com/
Or reprinted with a pdf download option linked here:
http://journal.crossfit.com/2010/04/glassman-sgw.tpi
The paper, short title “SGW”, is subtitled, “The cause of Earth’s climate change is the Sun”, “The fingerprint of the Sun is on Earth’s 160 year temperature record”, and “Contradicting IPCC conclusions, fingerprinting, & AGW”.
A five parameter transfer function on IPCC’s best model of the Sun has an output comparable in accuracy to IPCC’s 22-year smoothed estimate of its best estimate then of Earth’s global average temperature, HadCRUT3. The SGW model shows Earth’s temperature follows solar radiation with two lags of 134 years and 46 years. IPCC has yet to discover leads and lags among clouds, CO2, TSI, or temperature, yet it tells everyone it has successfully modeled climate. One of IPCC’s last discoveries was that water vapor lags surface temperature (Clausius-Clapeyron Equation), but IPCC uses the added water vapor only to increase its estimate of the greenhouse effect, a necessary positive feedback because CO2 isn’t enough. But IPCC doesn’t have added water vapor increase cloud cover and cloud albedo. Cloud feedback is the most powerful feedback in climate, positive with respect to solar radiation (the daily burn-off effect) and negative with respect to surface temperature (long lag mitigating of warming from any cause).