New papers show clear impact by solar activity on the earth’s climate. Images: NASA Earth Observatory.
Solar activity fluctuations control the climate: sea level in Venice, tropical storms in Australia, Amazon discharge rates
By Dr. Sebastian Lüning and Prof. Fritz Vahrenholt
(German text translated by P Gosselin)
It’s been claimed time and again that solar activity cycles for the most part can be neglected climatically. They hardly have any impact. Therefore it is all the more amazing when almost every month a new scientific study comes out that documents the exact opposite.
One example comes from November 2016 when the Geophysical Research Letters published a paper by Adrián Martínez-Asensio et al on the impact of solar activity on sea level. The scientists documented that the autumn sea level extreme in Venice and Triest are in fact controlled by the 11-year solar cycle.
In the wintertime the sun’s impact is seen at other coastal locations, namely Marseille, Ceuta, Brest and Newlyn. What follows is the paper’s fascinating abstract:
Decadal variability of European sea level extremes in relation to the solar activity
This study investigates the relationship between decadal changes in solar activity and sea level extremes along the European coasts and derived from tide gauge data. Autumn sea level extremes vary with the 11 year solar cycle at Venice as suggested by previous studies, but a similar link is also found at Trieste. In addition, a solar signal in winter sea level extremes is also found at Venice, Trieste, Marseille, Ceuta, Brest, and Newlyn. The influence of the solar cycle is also evident in the sea level extremes derived from a barotropic model with spatial patterns that are consistent with the correlations obtained at the tide gauges. This agreement indicates that the link to the solar cycle is through modulation of the atmospheric forcing. The only atmospheric regional pattern that showed variability at the 11 year period was the East Atlantic pattern.”
Another example is found in March, 2016. Jordahna Ellan-Ann Haig and Jonathan Nott reconstructed the tropical cyclone history of Australia for the past 1500 years. Here they discovered that the observed variability was mostly controlled by solar activity over decades and centuries. Haig and Nott hope that future tropical storm forecasts can benefit from the important solar factor.
The paper’s abstract follows:
Solar forcing over the last 1500 years and Australian tropical cyclone activity
Accurate seasonal and decadal predictions of tropical cyclone activity are essential for the development of mitigation strategies for the 2.7 billion residents living within cyclone prone regions. The traditional indices (Southern Oscillation Index and various sea surface temperature indices) have fallen short in recent years as seasonal predictors within the Australian region. The short length of these records (i.e., <50 years) has meant that our current knowledge of larger-scale drivers at interdecadal, centennial, and millennial scales is limited. The development of a new tropical cyclone activity index spanning the last 1500 years has enabled the examination of tropical cyclone climatology at higher temporal resolution than was previously possible. Here we show that in addition to other well-known climate indices, solar forcing largely drives decadal, interdecadal, and centennial cycles within the tropical cyclone record.”
Lastly there’s a fairly recent example from South America. Andrés Antico and Maria Tores examined the discharge rate of the Amazon for the last 100 years in an article published in 2015. They discovered that the development is very closely coupled to solar fluctuations. The paper’s abstract follows:
Evidence of a decadal solar signal in the Amazon River: 1903 to 2013
It has been shown that tropical climates can be notably influenced by the decadal solar cycle; however, the relationship between this solar forcing and the tropical Amazon River has been overlooked in previous research. In this study, we reveal evidence of such a link by analyzing a 1903–2013 record of Amazon discharge. We identify a decadal flow cycle that is anticorrelated with the solar activity measured by the decadal sunspot cycle. This relationship persists through time and appears to result from a solar influence on the tropical Atlantic Ocean. The amplitude of the decadal solar signal in flow is apparently modulated by the interdecadal North Atlantic variability. Because Amazonia is an important element of the planetary water cycle, our findings have implications for studies on global change.”
31 responses to “3 Recent Studies Indisputably Show Solar Activity Is Very Powerful Climate Driver!”
The sun is the climate driver. However humans do have an effect on the climate. One of man’s biggest contributions to global climate change is the of building dams and the altering of natural watercourses. America has been damming waterways for centuries, while the Russian were draining massive inland lakes like the Aral Sea.
Along with deforestation, the altering of waterway throughout the world has, and will continue, to cause more manmade climate change than any amount of atmospheric CO2 vented by humans in their industrial endeavors.
I have always believed the Sun played a significant role in our Climate. We are entering an other Solar Minimum. Expect things to cool off……..
The question is, how long are the lags in the system.
Dr David Even, seems to think 11-15 years
Time will tell. The oceans are still holding a lot of solar energy from the last half of last century and it will take its time to balance out.
typo fix.. Dr David Evans….
ps… someone was saying that the solar energy from the grand solar maximum, had added around 20 x 10^22 Joules since 1980. ! 😉
“believe” … Kenneth, did you read that? A skeptic believes 😉
The sun is the energy source of everything going on that we call climate. However, the amount of energy received is not directly determining the temperatures.
Yes, beginning in the year 1951, humans determined the temperatures of the Earth system. Right SebastianH? If not 1951, what year did humans take over from natural forcings?
I did not need a study to find out the sun has something to do with our climate. As a first grader I dicovered that, all by myself. Anybody who thinks the sun is not driving our climate should get himself some help.
Change your name to FAKE NEWS if you are citing the Gruniad. !!
Will Steffen… seriously !!! you have GOT to be joking.
It’s a story about a paper:
It must be nice to be in a position where you can dismiss facts by calling them fake if they don’t fit you agenda and be able to invent stuff (gravity thermal greenhouse effect) and call it the only truth. The sweet life of a skeptic…
“In the last six decades, anthropogenic forcings have driven exceptionally rapid rates of change in the Earth System.”
Comparisons of the intensity and magnitude of past warming and cooling climate changes show that the global warming experienced during the past century pales into insignificance when compared to the magnitude of profound climate reversals over the past 25,000 years. At least three warming events were 20–24 times the magnitude of warming over the past century, and four were 6–9 times the magnitude of warming over the past century.
““In the last six decades, anthropogenic forcings have driven exceptionally rapid rates of change in the Earth System.”
Ummm.. no , they haven’t.
The only anthropogenic forcing is the data adjustments.
There is absolutely NO sign of any anthropogenic warming in either satellite temperature set.
El Nino is NOTHING to do with anthropogenic anything.
Remove those El Ninos and you have two ZERO trend periods. 1980-1997, and 2001-2015.5
This paper published in “Anthropocene” journal (roflmao.. propaganda pap before you even get to the paper), is designed purely for the low-intellect AGW apostle like seb.
It has some whiz bang partials in it to make it look like heavy maths, certainly enough to fool gullible mathematically illiterate twerps like seb, but actually contains nothing in the way of maths or real science.
If you really think there is any science at all in that paper, you are truly way dumber than even I gave you credit for.
You are talking about the very peak of AGW FARCE.. and I suspect you know that full well.
Fred, the issue is not whether or not the Sun is driving our climate. Nobody doubts this.
The issue is whether or not solar variations are sufficient to drive variations in global temperature and precipitation.
I support the solar hypotheses, of which there are several, including the cosmological hypothesis of Svensmark.
Some hypotheses propose direct effects and others propose indirect effects, which makes the issue extremely complex and the data not at all easy to compile and interpret.
“Fred, the issue is not whether or not the Sun is driving our climate. Nobody doubts this. ”
All warmunists dispute it. They deny solar cycles, they deny the MWP, the Roman Climate Optimum, they now even refuse the old name “optimum” for “warm times” because they need to stop people from associating WARM with GOOD. They are on an eternal war against truth, logic and science.
Warmunists want us to see the sun as irrelevant, constant, never-changing.
They have also expended ALL credibility climate science had *BEFORE* infiltration by Marxist Warmunists. Generally, what Cultural Marxism does is it targets a credible institution, strategically infiltrates and overtakes it (see the amazing career of Mr. “honest or efficient” Steven Schneider); until they run it and use it for their agenda, which works for a while. See the DNC for another example. It inevitably crashes and burns, they just hope to make their profit and multiply while targeting the next sector of society until they have destroyed everything – which is their goal.
Controlling energy policies is crucial for them: To destroy all efficiency of society.
Don’t know if you’ve come across this…
“The latest discovery from the Curiosity rover has baffled researchers trying to work out how the ancient Martian atmosphere warmed, allowing water to flow and pool on the planet’s surface – and possibly sparking life.
However, according to a new analysis of data from NASA’s Mars rover Curiosity, Mars had far too little carbon dioxide about 3.5 billion years ago to provide enough greenhouse-effect warming to thaw water ice.”
If it wasn’t CO2??
Mars currently has an atmosphere made up of 960,000 ppm CO2 … and yet it’s still frigid there. If it had “too little carbon dioxide” at one time, how did it go from “too little” to 960,000 ppm (96% of Mars’ atmosphere is CO2, compared with 0.04% of Earth’s)? What caused the CO2 concentration to increase there, since humans didn’t do it?
Mars has a small GHE which results in a 1-5 K higher mean temperature than without a GHE. If you don’t understand why the effect is so small on Mars, I’d suggest some reading.
You are a fan of looking at the past, right? How did the CO2 end up in Earth’s atmosphere at the beginning of our planet? Maybe that answers you strange question.
With an atmosphere made up of 96% CO2 (960,000 ppm), compared to our 0.04% (400 ppm), one would think CO2 would have a greater impact. Right, Sebastian?
Does the quoted sentence really claim that the amount of CO2 was less in past times?
Do you understand why the GHE on Mars causes only a small 1-5 K increase in temperature despite having 20 times the amount of CO2 in its atmosphere than we have on Earth?
Um, Sebastian, 960,000 ppm is not “20 times” 400 ppm. You may want to check your math before proceeding further. Yes, I’m confident I understand more about Mars’ and Venus’ and Earth’s atmospheres than you do.
STILL the useless drone that calls itself seb, is TOTALLY UNABLE to put forward a single paper that shows CO2 causes warming in a convective atmosphere.
Avoid, run, hide, but the worm cannot dispute that there is NO CO2 WARMING signal the satellite era, none, in any data .
Empty as usual.. an empty droning seb.
Don’t bother, skeptics do not seem to understand complex systems. Most of the commenters here live in a world of simple equations. Change one variable and the output changes accordingly. They are always looking for direct correlations between two changing variables …
Oh stop it with your stupid attributions. You really make yourself look like a little child with your false claims Sebastian.
Seb doesn’t even understand simple systems.
How’s that barista work going, seb.?
Oh the irony…
So, according to SebastianH, early 20th century explosive glacier melt was caused by anthropogenic soot-forcing. And the advancing of glaciers between the 1960s and 1990s was caused by…whatever else direct cause-effect variable he makes up.
“Don’t bother, skeptics do not seem to understand complex systems…..
….They are always looking for direct correlations between two changing variables …”
Over-simplified climate models and modelers definitely underrate how natural climate variation evolves and progresses.
Those models and the very limited amount of real science behind it misunderstands the holistic complexity of the this world’s weather and climate system.
The one thing I see is that there are very few direct cause and effect correlation in either weather or climate, it is far more complex than people like Gavin, Hansen, Trenberth, or the majority of climate modelers can possibly understand. Anyone that says they do understand climate is deluded.
Indisputably? So that’s settled.
[…] Solar activity fluctuations control the climate: sea level in Venice, tropical storms in Australia, … […]
lol.. who would have guessed..
EU countries looking after their own people wrt electricity, before selling to others.
[…] Qui, l’articolo originale. […]