Scientists Find Climate’s ‘Cause Of Causes’…Highest Solar Activity In 4000 Years Just Ended…Cooling Begins In 2025

“It is generally accepted that the climate warms during periods of strong solar activity (e.g., the Medieval Warm Period) and cools during periods of low solar activity (e.g., the Little Ice Age).” Lyu et al., 2016

Graph Source: WoodForTrees.org
Scientists are increasingly tuning out the claims that the Earth’s temperatures are predominantly shaped by anthropogenic CO2 emissions, or that future climate is destined to be alarmingly warm primarily due to the rise in trace atmospheric gases.  Instead, solar scientists are continuing to advance our understanding of solar activity and its effect on the Earth system, and their results are progressively suggestive of robust correlations between solar variability and climate changes.
For example, in 2016 alone, there were at least 132 peer-reviewed scientific papers documenting a significant solar influence on climate.  Among them there were 18 papers that directly connected centennial-scale periods of low solar activity (the Little Ice Age) with cooler climates, and periods of high solar activity (the Medieval Warm Period and the Modern Warm Period [20th Century]) with high solar activity levels.  Another 10 papers warned of an impending solar minimum and concomitant cooling period in the coming decades.
And this trend of scientists linking climate changes to solar forcing mechanisms — and bypassing an anthropogenic explanation — continues to rage on in 2017.

A Seminal New Paper Unveils The ‘Cause Of Causes’ Of Climate Change

In their groundbreaking New Astronomy paper, Norwegian professors Harald Yndestad and Jan-Erik Solheim indicate that the modern (1940-2015) Grand Maximum of very high solar activity — the highest solar activity levels in 4,000 years — has just ended.   Within 10 years, or by 2025, these scientists project the next solar minimum period (which will be similar in character to the late 18th Century’s Dalton Minimum) will exert its cooling effect on the Earth’s climate.
Yndestad and Solheim have been working together on this project for more than 2 years.  Although Dr. Yndestad was “skeptical about the idea of ​​sunspots as climate indicators” initially, the two discovered “for the first time” a strong long-term correlation between Total Solar Irradiance (TSI) and sunspots for periods of 84 and 210 years, confirming the “Cause of causes” of climate change.  Details can be found in their illuminating new paper.

Yndestad and Solheim, 2017

Summary

“Deterministic models based on the stationary periods confirm the results through a close relation to known long solar minima since 1000 A.D. and suggest a modern maximum period from 1940 to 2015. The model computes a new Dalton-type sunspot minimum from approximately 2025 to 2050 and a new Dalton-type period TSI minimum from approximately 2040 to 2065. … Periods with few sunspots are associated with low solar activity and cold climate periods. Periods with many sunspots are associated with high solar activity and warm climate periods.”

1940-2015 Grand Maximum Of Solar Activity, Highest In 4,000 Years, Just Ended

“Studies that employ cosmogenic isotope data and sunspot data indicate that we are currently leaving a grand activity maximum, which began in approximately 1940 and is now declining (Usoskin et al., 2003; Solanki et al., 2004; Abreu et al., 2008). Because grand maxima  and minima occur on centennial or millennial timescales, they can only be investigated using proxy data, i.e., solar activity reconstructed from 10Be and 14C time-calibrated data. The conclusion is that the activity level of the Modern Maximum (1940–2000) is a relatively rare event, with the previous similarly high levels of solar activity observed 4 and 8 millennia ago (Usoskin et al., 2003). Nineteen grand maxima have been identified by Usoskin et al. (2007) in an 11,000-yr series.”

Solar Activity Minimum/Maximum Periods Linked To Colder/Warmer Climates

“Twenty-seven grand minima are identified with a total duration of 1900 years, or approximately 17% of the time during the past 11,500 years (Usoskin et al., 2007). An adjustment-free reconstruction of the solar activity over the last three millennia confirms four grand minima since the year 1000: Maunder (1640–1720), Spörer (1390–1550), Wolf (1270–1340) and Oort (1010–1070) (Usoskin et al., 2007). The Dalton minimum (1790–1820) does not fit the definition of a grand minimum; it is more likely a regular deep minimum that is observed once per century or an immediate state between the grand minimum and normal activity (Usoskin, 2013).  Temperature reconstructions for the last millennium for the Northern Hemisphere (Ljungquist, 2010) show a medieval maximum temperature at approximately the year 1000 [Medieval Warm Period] and a cooling period starting at approximately 1350 [Little Ice Age], immediately after the Wolf minimum and lasting nearly 500 years, with the coldest period in what is referred to as the Little Ice Age (LIA) at the time of the Maunder minimum. A cold period was also observed during the time of the Dalton minimum. The Maunder and the Dalton minima are associated with less solar activity and colder climate periods. In this investigation, minimum solar activity periods may serve as a reference for the identified minimum irradiations in the TSI oscillations.”

Other scientists have just published papers in peer-reviewed journals documenting a robust correlation between solar activity and surface temperatures in the paleoclimate record.  Zawiska et al. (2017) have found that the amplitudes of the warming and cooling periods — modulated by changes in solar activity and the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) — during the last 1,000 years far exceeded the temperature changes that have occurred since about 1950, or since anthropogenic CO2 emissions began rising at an accelerating pace.  For example, these scientists point out that within a matter of 100 years (1050-1150 to 1150-1250), summer temperatures rose from 9.2°C during a low solar activity period (Oort Minimum) to 12.0°C in concert with the subsequent rise in solar activity.
Zawiska and colleagues also point out that the rise in modern era temperatures began around 1800, not the 20th century.  In fact, they find that temperatures rose by 4.3°C (from 8.5°C to 12.8°C) within 75 years starting at the beginning of the 19th century (+0.57°C per decade), and this warming “correlates with the positive NAO index and increased solar activity.”   The authors further indicate that the warming in the 20th/21st centuries has been “less pronounced” by comparison.
During the 19th century, of course, anthropogenic CO2 emissions rates were but a tiny fraction of what has been observed since the mid-20th century, strongly suggesting that temperature changes associated with natural variations in atmospheric/oceanic cycles (NAO) and solar activity far exceed the forcing strength of anthropogenic CO2 emissions.

Zawiska et al., 2017

Summary

“The chironomid-based temperature reconstruction from Lake Atnsjøen in Eastern Norway with mean resolution of 30 years provided evidence that large-scale processes, such as the NAO fluctuations and solar activity modified local climate, and subsequently affected lakes functioning. The three minor cooling periods were reconstructed in the first half of the Millennium: 1050–1150, 1270–1370, 1440–1470 CE, that coincide with solar activity minima: Oort, Wulf, and Spörer respectively. Furthermore, a two peaked cooling period in the second half of the Millennium was identified that coincided with the LIA. These changes co-occurred with the prevailing negative NAO index.”

Cold Periods (Temp. Average 9.2 °C) Correlate With Low Solar Activity, NAO

“At 1050–1150 CE the first of the short-term cooling periods of the last Millennium began and the mean July temperature in the Lake Atnsjøen region dropped to 9.2 °C. The beginning of this cooling coincided with the Oort solar activity minimum. The reconstructed climate deterioration agrees very well with temperatures revealed for Europe (PAGES 2k Consortium, 2013) and Finland (Luoto and Helama, 2010), and partly with tree-ring based temperature trends from Northern Sweden (Osborn and Briffa, 2006). … The climate cooling around 1100 CE has been observed also in Northern America, Russia and Central Asia (Osborn and Briffa, 2006; Wanner et al., 2008), but intrestingly not in Greenland (Osborn and Briffa, 2006). … The beginning of the 1270–1370 CE cooling coincide with Wulf solar activity minimum suggesting that the climate was responding to Sun activity. The climate cooling synchronous to this solar minimum had almost global range and it has been recorded from Europe, Arctic, North America and Antarctica (Osborn and Briffa, 2006; PAGES 2k Consortium, 2013) but again not in Greenland (Osborn and Briffa, 2006). … The beginning of the 1440–1470 CE cold period is synchronous to the pronounce negative NAO phase (Trouet et al., 2009). … Maunder solar minimum caused a very deep negative NAO index phase (Shindell et al., 2001), which consecutively lead to significant drop in the reconstructed temperature.”

Warm Periods (Temp. Average 12°C) Correlate With High Solar Activity, NAO 

“According to presented reconstruction, climate shifted towards warmer conditions during 1150–1250 CE, as mean July temperature raised to 12 °C. Studies from Finland and Sweden also indicate short climate warming around 1200 CE (Luoto and Helama, 2010; Osborn and Briffa, 2006)  … The above described time interval 1000–1250 CE coincides with the MCA [Medieval Climate Anomaly] that occurred around 950–1250 CE and was regarded as a generally warmer and drier period (Mann et al., 2009).
The temperature reconstruction from Lake Atnsjøen indicates that recent and ongoing climate warming began already in 1800 CE following the LIA. Temperatures increased very fast, from 8.5 to 12.8 °C during the first 75 years, but in the 20th century the increase became less pronounced.
The warming at the beginning of 19th century in the region of Lake Atnsjøen coincides with a reconstruction from Southern Finland (Luoto, 2013), and a record from Northern Sweden (Osborn and Briffa, 2006).  Its onset correlates with the positive NAO index and increased solar activity.”


Another scientist just published a paper in the journal Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology that also concludes solar activity drove variations in the East Asian Monsoon (EAM), El Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO), and the centennial-scale cooling periods corresponding to the Oort, Wolf, Spörer, and Maunder sunspot minimums.
In his graph of Western Tropical Pacific sea surface temperatures (SSTs), notice how Park (2017) also documents a dramatic warming event occurred beginning about 1800, with the SST warming rate and amplitude far exceeding that which has occurred in recent decades, once again demonstrating the lack of correlation between anthropogenic CO2 emissions and surface temperatures relative to natural variation.

Park, 2017

“Late Holocene climate change in coastal East Asia was likely driven by ENSO variation.   Our tree pollen index of warmness (TPIW) shows important late Holocene cold events associated with low sunspot periods such as Oort, Wolf, Spörer, and Maunder Minimum. Comparisons among standard Z-scores of filtered TPIW, ΔTSI, and other paleoclimate records from central and northeastern China, off the coast of northern Japan, southern Philippines, and Peru all demonstrate significant relationships [between solar activity and climate]. This suggests that solar activity drove Holocene variations in both East Asian Monsoon (EAM) and El Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO). In particular, the latter seems to have predominantly controlled the coastal climate of East Asia to the extent that the influence of precession was nearly muted during the late Holocene.”


The year has just begun, and, in addition to the 3 papers introduced above, there have already been several other 2017 scientific papers published in scientific journals documenting a robust correlation between solar activity and climate changes.  With the rapidly growing body of evidence that has been accumulating within the last few years, it can no longer be said that it is “settled” science that the Sun and its modulation of natural atmospheric/oceanic oscillations (NAO, ENSO, PDO, AMO) has only a negligible influence on climate.  The claim that we human beings predominantly drive climate changes with our CO2 emissions is increasingly being challenged, if not categorically undermined, in the peer-reviewed scientific literature.

Sun et al., 2017

“[A]t least six centennial droughts occurred at about 7300, 6300, 5500, 3400, 2500 and 500 cal yr BP. Our findings are generally consistent with other records from the ISM [Indian Summer Monsoon]  region, and suggest that the monsoon intensity is primarily controlled by solar irradiance on a centennial time scale. This external forcing may have been amplified by cooling events in the North Atlantic and by ENSO activity in the eastern tropical Pacific, which shifted the ITCZ further southwards. The inconsistency between local rainfall amount in the southeastern margin of the QTP and ISM intensity may also have been the result of the effect of solar activity on the local hydrological cycle on the periphery of the plateau.”

Deng et al., 2017

The results indicate that the climate of the Medieval Climate Anomaly (MCA, AD 900–1300) was similar to that of the Current Warm Period (CWP, AD 1850–present), which contradicts previous studies. … As for the Little Ice Age (LIA, AD 1550–1850), the results from this study, together with previous data from the Makassar Strait, indicate a cold and wet period compared with the CWP and the MCA in the western Pacific. The cold LIA period agrees with the timing of the Maunder sunspot minimum and is therefore associated with low solar activity.”

Zielhofer et al., 2017

Western Mediterranean Holocene record of abrupt hydro-climatic changes … Imprints of North Atlantic meltwater discharges, NAO and solar forcing …Early Holocene winter rain minima are in phase with cooling events and millennial-scale meltwater discharges in the sub-polar North Atlantic. … [A] significant hydro-climatic shift at the end of the African Humid Period (∼5 ka) indicates a change in climate forcing mechanisms. The Late Holocene climate variability in the Middle Atlas features a multi-centennial-scale NAO-type pattern, with Atlantic cooling and Western Mediterranean winter rain maxima generally associated with solar minima.”

Matveev et al., 2017

“An increase in atmospheric moisture for the warm period of the year (May–September) since 1890s, and mean annual temperatures since the 1950s was identified. During the same time period, there was a marked increase in amplitude of the annual variations for temperature and precipitation. … These fluctuations are consistent with 10–12-years Schwabe–Wolf, 22-years Hale, and the 32–36-years Bruckner Solar Cycles. There was an additional relationship found between high-frequency (short-period) climate fluctuations, lasting for about three years, and 70–90-years fluctuations of the moisture regime in the study region corresponding to longer cycles.”

83 responses to “Scientists Find Climate’s ‘Cause Of Causes’…Highest Solar Activity In 4000 Years Just Ended…Cooling Begins In 2025”

  1. ClimateOtter

    Some 8-10 years ago, before I jumped into the argument, I looked up either the first or second IPCC report and found something to the effect that they Expected a ‘slight cooling period’ to begin around the 2030s.

    I’m pretty sure that expectation has not shown up in subsequent reports, and I can no longer find my way back to it in those first two reports.

    And despite anything sod will attempt to claim, YES, it *was* in at least one of those reports and I did read it. I suspect it went away when the hockey schtick showed up, because if anything a cooling period would contradict claims of rapid, unstoppable temperature rise.

    1. David Appell

      Citation to your claim?

  2. ClimateOtter

    Hmp. Well I know I said some things in the past that might have put me on moderation, but pretty sure that past is long dead. Can I come off that list please?

    1. DirkH

      There’s no list. It just happens with Pierre’s wordpress settings. Happens to me as well, on and off.

    2. tom0mason

      Heck I get comments turning up out of moderation that I’ve long forgotten I made. But then my memory is not what it was…

      So ClimateOtter, just keep patient.

  3. Schwache Sonne – kühle Erde: Wie schwach wird der nächste Sonnenzyklus nach 2020 ? – wobleibtdieglobaleerwaermung

    […] Scientists Find Climate’s ‚Cause Of Causes’…Highest Solar Activity In 4000 Years… […]

  4. tom0mason

    Kenneth,
    I think you may also interested in the paper
    “A connection from Arctic stratospheric ozone to El Niño-Southern oscillation” by Fei Xie1, Jianping Li1.
    available (free) at http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/11/12/124026/meta

    Basically they model the El Nino/La Nina very accurately using solar data!

    Abstract
    Antarctic stratospheric ozone depletion is thought to influence the Southern Hemisphere tropo-
    spheric climate. Recently, Arctic stratospheric ozone (ASO) variations have been found to affect the
    middle-high latitude tropospheric climate in the Northern Hemisphere. This paper demonstrates that
    the impact of ASO can extend to the tropics, with the ASO variations leading El Niño-Southern
    Oscillation (ENSO) events by about 20 months. Using observations, analysis, and simulations, the
    connection between ASO and ENSO is established by combining the high-latitude stratosphere to
    troposphere pathway with the extratropical to tropical climate teleconnection. This shows that the
    ASO radiative anomalies influence the North Pacific Oscillation (NPO), and the anomalous NPO and
    induced Victoria Mode anomalies link to the North Pacific circulation that then influences ENSO.
    Our results imply that incorporating realistic and time-varying ASO into climate system models may
    help to improve ENSO predictions.

  5. Bryson

    it seems like temperatures rose after solar activity rose in the early 20th century warming period according to that chart plus the solar minimum of 2008/2009 was the deepest since 1913 and cycle 204 is the weakest in a 100 years I do not think solar activity is higher now than in the early 20th century.

  6. sun
  7. sod

    What is the trick here? it is hidden in plain sight:

    “#Time series (sidc-ssn) from 1749.05 to 2015.47
    #Selected data from 1850
    #Averaged with 50-sample running mean
    #Offset by -40
    #Integral (cumulative) generated
    #Normalised to -0.5..0.5”

    http://www.woodfortrees.org/data/hadcrut4gl/from:1850/mean:50/normalise/plot/sidc-ssn/from:1850/mean:50/offset:-40/integral/normalise

    This is curve fitting at its best.

    1. tom0mason

      The trick is the real hockey stick!

    2. DirkH

      You’re averaging, then you’re integrating? What’s the purpose of that? Do you want to estimate the effect of temperature on an ice mass?

      1. sod

        “You’re averaging, then you’re integrating? What’s the purpose of that? ”

        Not me. It is the graph at the top of this discussion!

        http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1850/mean:50/normalise/plot/sidc-ssn/from:1850/mean:50/offset:-40/integral/normalise

        1. AndyG55

          The non-warming period from 1850 to 1920 indicates that the sunspot number for zero temperature trend is the average SSN from 1850-1920, which is 42

          …so the offset of -40 when looking at solar warming/cooling is about right.

          Only a MORONIC IDIOT would use an offset of -80.
          That would indicate a total and ABSOLUTE IGNORANCE of anything mathematical…

          But, it is sop, so that is to be expected.

        2. DirkH

          Oh! I didn’t notice averaging is on one time series and integrating on the other! Sorry! I was not able to get a plot displayed when I made that comment, just got a list of numbers. Works now so I see what you’re trying to do there.

    3. Pethefin

      Sod-the-science-denier rejecting peer reviewed science papers due to his religion. Sweet.

    4. AndyG55

      ““#Time series (sidc-ssn) from 1749.05 to 2015.47”

      You are truly a Moron, sop….. Hadcrut only starts in 1850

  8. yonason

    Given that there is a pause for the last 18 years, the following temperature raw data from around the world up to about 14 year ago probably isn’t going to change much.
    https://www.john-daly.com/stations/stations.htm

    There is NO global warming, at least not without fraudulently “adjusting” the data.

  9. Mikky

    BBC radio had a piece today about how Icelandic clams have revealed water temperature changes over the last 1000 years, mentioning previous heresies that solar effects can be seen, and that over 1000 AD to 1800 the sea changes came first, the atmosphere followed. Has the BBC changed its spots? … no way, they reassured us that the CO2 warming signal is still clearly evident in the last 200 years. They also explained why those darned sceptics have become so distrustful of experts, apparently its because by explaining science certain people think they know enough to be able to reject what they are being told, something known to all religions … never explain it, or it will collapse.

  10. Casper

    Meanwhile the sun is blank!
    by http://spaceweather.com/
    SUNSPOTS VANISH, SPACE WEATHER CONTINUES: So far in 2017, the big story in space weather is sunspots–or rather, the lack thereof. The sun has been blank more than 90% of the time. Only one very tiny spot observed for a few hours on Jan. 3rd interrupted a string of spotless days from New Years through Jan.11th. Devoid of dark cores, yesterday’s sun is typical of the year so far.
    The last time the sun produced a similar string of spotless days was May of 2010, almost 7 years ago. That was near the end of the previous deep Solar Minimum. The current stretch is a sign that Solar Minimum is coming again. Sunspot numbers rise and fall with an ~11-year period, slowly oscillating between Solar Max and Solar Min. In 2017, the pendulum is swinging toward the bottom.

    1. tom0mason

      And another worthy view of our solar system
      http://www.landscheidt.info/?q=node/280 and all those complex cycles.

      1. yonason

        That’s my preferred source. I think he’s a lot more objective than NASA, and others.

  11. The Indomitable Snowman, Ph.D.

    Actually, believe it or not, today there was FINALLY some proof of climate change!

    For years, the warmists have been postulating the appearance of “climate refugees,” who would head north due to increasingly hot weather.

    Today, the San Diego Chargers announced that they are going to be relocating to Los Angeles – about a 2.5 – 3 hour’s drive *north* up I-5.

    They’re obviously climate refugees.

    If that doesn’t prove that climate change is real, I don’t know what will! 🙂

    BTW, the first attempt at a new team logo is hideous:

    http://b.fssta.com/uploads/2017/01/c1-653wukaals-f-2.vadapt.767.high.0.jpg

    That must be due to climate change as well!

    1. yonason

      And don’t forget the Colts moved from Baltimore to Indy. That was back in ’84, so climate change has obviously been going on for a long time, and athletes are far more attuned to it than anyone else.

      1. yonason

        p.2. that’s all the way from 39.2904° N to 39.7684° N.

        How’s that for sensitivity?!

  12. sod
    1. P Gosselin
      1. sod

        That graph also has zero correlation to temperature increase!

        you need to add a couple of tricks to produce a correlation!

        1. AndyG55

          Trying to PRETEND, even in your own feeble mind, that there is not a LARGE increase on sunspot numbers/solar activity over the latter half of last century is really one of the most PATHETIC attempts at DENIAL I have ever seen… even you do, sop.

          The mathematical stupidity to produce what you produce, can only be put down to you being one of the most ignorant or internally corrupt people on the planet.

          1. AndyG55

            I should have proofed better

            “even you do, sop ” …

            change to

            … even from you, sop.

      2. AndyG55
    2. AndyG55

      really sop,

      That graph is the height of statistical JUNK

      Normalise it so the whole first part is below zero, then integrate so you show a decrease

      PATHETIC attempt, using absolutely MORONIC mathematical procedures..

      But its all you have, isn’t it sop.

      Statistical malpractice.

    3. AndyG55

      let’s change the off-set shall we.

      Just to show everybody the totally PATHETIC SCAM that sop is trying on.

      http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1850/mean:50/normalise/plot/sidc-ssn/from:1850/mean:50/offset:-30/integral/normalise

    4. AndyG55

      Since there is no warming from 1850 to 1920, it makes sense that the average sunspot number is approximately the “hold steady” value, so the off-set used should be the average of the sunspot number from 1850 to 1920..

      Which is 42.

      http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1850/mean:50/normalise/plot/sidc-ssn/from:1850/mean:50/offset:-42/integral/normalise

      using an offset of 80 is just pure soppy nonsense.

  13. sod

    I will repeat my simple question: Why is an offset of -30 or -40 “true” and gives a good graph (one that seems to explain temperature changes), while other offset numbers (the ones given by me) are bad (as they produce very little correlation)?

    I am really curious and ready to learn!

    1. AndyG55

      I have explained it 3 or 4 times!!

      1. AndyG55

        The first half of the temperature series shows basically zero warming.. Average sunspot number 42 ish

        That shows that around that average number is the zero warming number.. ie peaks mostly below 90 on average

        So if you are above that average, like you are over ALL of the second half of last century, you should get warming up to another equilibrium temperature, barring other influences.

        The average from 1938-2001 was 75.. that is nearly DOUBLE the earlier average

      2. Pethefin

        Andy, please stop feeding the thread-hijacker

        1. AndyG55

          His/her/its CRAP cannot be left unanswered, if not for the vain hope of actually educating it, but for any other readers.

          If you leave its CRAP sitting on the walkway.. the unsuspecting will tread in it.

          1. yonason

            100% agree.

  14. AndyG55

    While there are some other minor forcings that we may or may not have found yet, it is very obvious that Solar activity is a major player.

    On the other hand, there is absolutely nothing to indicate that CO2 has any warming effect what-so-ever.

    The ABSOLUTELY BENFICIAL rise in aCO2 being purely from natural ocean warming with a little help from humans burning sequestered carbon deposits.

  15. AndyG55

    What’s interesting is that with the right weighting of SS Integral , AMo and OD, you can get very close to HAdcrut or GISS Temperature series

    https://s19.postimg.org/6loeewmlv/AMOSSI_etc.png

    Still not correct, of course, (because its Had, Giss, therefore junk temperatures)

    If however, you take the weighted (0.5, 1,1) 3 cycle average of sunspots and delay it somewhat, as per David Evans’s theory, you end up with a nearly flat trend from 1979 to 2015, which, discounting El Ninos, is a very close match to the satellite temperature series.

    Still have a bit of investigation to do with the data, but with a bit of natural AMO and PDO to give the 1940’s peak then cooling to 1970, a pretty close match to reality should be possible. These are all KNOWN, PROVEN factors influencing temperatures, unlike CO2 which is proven to have no effect whatsoever.

    1. AndyG55

      should be PDO not OD. !! DOH!

  16. Massive Data Tampering Uncovered At NASA – Warmth, Cooling Disappears Due To Incompatibility With Models

    […] a reconstruction of solar activity (Total Solar Irradiance, or TSI) for 1700-2013.  As explained here, the 20th Century contained the so-called Modern Grand Maximum of very high solar […]

  17. David Appell

    “Within 10 years, or by 2025, these scientists project the next solar minimum period (which will be similar in character to the late 18th Century’s Dalton Minimum) will exert its cooling effect on the Earth’s climate.”

    Any (small) solar cooling (~ -0.1 K/(W/m2)) will be easily swamped by man’s emissions of GHGs:

    “On the effect of a new grand minimum of solar activity on the future climate on Earth,” G. Fuelner and S. Rahmstorf, Geo Res Lett vol. 37, L05707 2010.
    http://www.pik-potsdam.de/~stefan/Publications/Journals/feulner_rahmstorf_2010.pdf

    “Increased greenhouse gases enhance regional climate response to a Maunder Minimum,” Song et al, Geo Res Lett vol. 37, L01703 (2010) http://www-cirrus.ucsd.edu/~zhang/PDFs/Song_et_al-2010.pdf

    “What influence will future solar activity changes over the 21st century have on projected global near-surface temperature changes?” Gareth S. Jones, et al, JGR v 117, D05103 (2012) doi:10.1029/2011JD017013, 2012.
    http://www.leif.org/EOS/2011JD017013.pdf