Body Of Science Continues To Grow …Solar Impact On Climate System Is Major And Unequivocal

Sebastian Lüning and Fritz Vahrenholt present more scientific papers showing the clear and major connection between solar activity and climate.

The sun drives the climate: Proof of the 90 and 200-year cycles in the earth’s climate history

By Dr. Sebastian Lüning and Prof. Fritz Vahrenholt
(Translated/edited by P Gosselin)

Solar activity fluctuates very much in cycles, among them the Gleissberg Cycle over 90 years, plus or minus 30 years. In March 2015 a study by Orgutsov et al. appeared in the journal Advances in Space Research which discovered the solar Gleissberg Cycle during the growth period of the northern hemisphere over the past 450 years. The authors suspected a solar impact on temperatures on plant growth. The abstract:

Evidence for the Gleissberg solar cycle at the high-latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere
Time evolution of growing season temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere was analyzed using both wavelet and Fourier approaches. A century-scale (60–140 year) cyclicity was found in the summer temperature reconstruction from the Taymir peninsula (∼72° N, ∼105° E) and other high-latitude (60–70° N) regions during the time interval AD 1576–1970. This periodicity is significant and consists of two oscillation modes, 60–70 year and 120–140 year variations. In the summer temperatures from the Yamal peninsula (∼70° N, ∼67° E) only a shorter-term (60–70 year) variation is present. A comparison of the secular variation in the Northern Hemisphere temperature proxies with the corresponding variations in sunspot numbers and the fluxes of cosmogenic 10Be in Greenland ice shows that a probable cause of this variability is the modulation of temperature by the century-scale solar cycle of Gleissberg. This is consistent with the results obtained previously for Northern Fennoscandia (67°–70° N, 19°–33° E). Thus, evidence for a connection between century-long variations in solar activity and climate was obtained for the entire boreal zone of the Northern Hemisphere.”

A year earlier Ogurtsov and a Finnish colleague had already published another paper on the Gleissberg cycles in the Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics. Back then they reported a solar Gleissberg Cycle in the nitrate concentrations in polar ice cores:

Evidence of the solar Gleissberg cycle in the nitrate concentration in polar ice
Two sets of nitrate (NO3) concentration data, obtained from Central Greenland and East Antarctic (Dronning Maud Land) ice cores, were analyzed statistically. Distinct century-scale (50–150 yr) variability was revealed in both data sets during AD 1576–1990. It was found that century-type variation in Greenland and Antarctic nitrate correlates fairly significantly with the corresponding Gleissberg cycle: (a) in sunspot number over 1700–1970 AD; (b) in 10Be concentration in Central and South Greenland over 1576–1970 AD. Thus, presence of century-scale relationship between polar nitrate and solar activity was confirmed over the last 4 centuries. That proves that NO3 concentration in polar ice caps could serve as indicator of long-term solar variability.”

Another crucial solar cycle is the Suess-de Vries Cycle. In February 2015 Hans-Joachim Lüdecke together with his colleagues Weiss and Hempelmann published an overview of the climatic link of this solar cycle in the journal Climate of the Past Discussions:

Paleoclimate forcing by the solar De Vries/Suess cycle
A large number of investigations of paleoclimate have noted the influence of a ~ 200 year oscillation which has been related to the De Vries/Suess cycle of solar activity. As such studies were concerned mostly with local climate, we have used extensive northern hemispheric proxy data sets of Büntgen and of Christiansen/Ljungqvist together with a southern hemispheric tree-ring set, all with 1 year time resolution, to analyze the climate influence of the solar cycle. As there is increasing interest in temperature rise rates, as opposed to present absolute temperatures, we have analyzed temperature differences over 100 years to shed light on climate dynamics of at least the last 2500 years. Fourier- and Wavelet transforms as well as nonlinear optimization to sine functions show the dominance of the 200 year cycle. The sine wave character of the climate oscillations permits an approximate prediction of the near future climate.”

Also a paper by Tiwari und Rajesh published in May, 2014 in the journal Geophysical Research Letters is in full agreement with the above paper. In it the authors found the Suess-de Vries cycle in the precipitation distribution in Northwest China over the past 700 years:

Imprint of long-term solar signal in groundwater recharge fluctuation rates from Northwest China
Multiple spectral and statistical analyses of a 700 yearlong temporal record of groundwater recharge from the dry lands, Badain Jaran Desert (Inner Mongolia) of Northwest China reveal a stationary harmonic cycle at ~200 ± 20 years. Interestingly, the underlying periodicity in groundwater recharge fluctuations is similar to those of solar-induced climate cycle “Suess wiggles” and appears to be coherent with phases of the climate fluctuations and solar cycles. Matching periodicity of groundwater recharge rates and solar and climate cycles renders a strong impression that solar-induced climate signals may act as a critical amplifier for driving the underlying hydrographic cycle through the common coupling of long-term Sun-climate groundwater linkages.”


Readers will also find a longer list of peer-reviewed papers showing the sun’s major impact on climate here. – PG

5 responses to “Body Of Science Continues To Grow …Solar Impact On Climate System Is Major And Unequivocal”

  1. Curious George

    I don’t know much about 90 and 200-year solar cycles, but I would appreciate a proof of an 11-year cycle in the Earth’s climate history.

  2. Harry Dale Huffman

    “…century-type variation” and “correlates fairly significantly” are examples of just what is wrong with climate science (and no doubt all the other earth sciences): Wooly-headed, imprecise observations that mean nothing, and less than nothing. I don’t even need to hear what they consider a “fairly significant” correlation (they can’t be bothered to state the r-square, which tells me all I need to know). Anybody who thinks, at this late stage, when climate science has been shown to be completely error-ridden, that doing a physics-free — and scale-free: their proposed “causes” are routinely too small to have the size of effects they claim, as in the much-loved but physically senseless Milankovitch theory — “frequency analysis” is worth more than the paper it is written on, is fundamentally miseducated and thoroughly deluded (and, most tellingly, it seems to be universally accepted, so we are dealing with a general incompetence, among all scientists today). This just shows me, yet again, that there is no valid climate science (hell, there is no valid earth science, if this is all the scientists can do these days) and no competent climate scientists.

  3. Why, Yes, The Sun Is A Major Driver Of The Climate » Pirate's Cove

    […] Cult of Climastrology members think the primary, heck, in some cases, the only, driver of climate. At lest during the current warm period. Reality and science say different. This comes via NoTricksZone […]

  4. Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup #197 | Watts Up With That?
  5. Ken Haapala: Is the Sun Rising? | Tallbloke's Talkshop

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this. More information at our Data Privacy Policy