Am I still allowed to question climate change?

[Berberis]

Low solar activity link to cold UK winters

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8615789.stm

 

How many times have I been told I’m wrong when linking solar activity to colder winters by supposed experts and knowledgeable people on the subject

[Streamline]

series of links to websites misrepresenting evidence

 

 

Haha I wonder where they got that idea from......

[Wildcat]

Low solar activity link to cold UK winters

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8615789.stm

 

How many times have I been told I’m wrong when linking solar activity to colder winters by supposed experts and knowledgeable people on the subject

 

I don't recall you making that argument before.

 

It is however a part of an argument I have consistently made that solar output has been constant if not declining over the recent past and so solar energy cannot account for recent global warming. An argument, I have received numerous criticisms for, even from yourself.

[Berberis]

I don't recall you making that argument before.

 

It is however a part of an argument I have consistently made that solar output has been constant if not declining over the recent past and so solar energy cannot account for recent global warming. An argument, I have received numerous criticisms for, even from yourself.

 

Solar activity has been low for the last 10-13 years which coincides almost perfectly with the drop in global temperatures over the same period. Prior to that the sun was going through a period of high activity, that also coincides with high the northern hemisphere summer temperatures, in the late 80's and early 90's.

[Wildcat]

Solar activity has been low for the last 10-13 years which coincides almost perfectly with the drop in global temperatures over the same period. Prior to that the sun was going through a period of high activity, that also coincides with high the northern hemisphere summer temperatures, in the late 80's and early 90's.

 

You are wrong about the drop in global temperatures.

 

Since 1970, the Earth's heat content has been rising at a rate of 6 x 1021 Joules per year. In more meaningful terms, the planet has been accumulating energy at a rate of 190,260 gigawatts. Considering a typical nuclear power plant has an output of 1 gigawatt, imagine 190,000 nuclear power plants pouring their energy output directly into our oceans.

 

http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-cooling.htm

 

As for your theories on Solar activity. How do you explain all these papers coming to an opposite conclusion?

 

* Erlykin 2009: "We deduce that the maximum recent increase in the mean surface temperature of the Earth which can be ascribed to solar activity is 14% of the observed global warming"

* Benestad 2009: "Our analysis shows that the most likely contribution from solar forcing a global warming is 7 ± 1% for the 20th century and is negligible for warming since 1980."

* Lockwood 2008: "It is shown that the contribution of solar variability to the temperature trend since 1987 is small and downward; the best estimate is ?1.3% and the 2? confidence level sets the uncertainty range of ?0.7 to ?1.9%."

* Lockwood 2008: "The conclusions of our previous paper, that solar forcing has declined over the past 20 years while surface air temperatures have continued to rise, are shown to apply for the full range of potential time constants for the climate response to the variations in the solar forcings."

* Ammann 2007: "Although solar and volcanic effects appear to dominate most of the slow climate variations within the past thousand years, the impacts of greenhouse gases have dominated since the second half of the last century."

* Lockwood 2007: "The observed rapid rise in global mean temperatures seen after 1985 cannot be ascribed to solar variability, whichever of the mechanism is invoked and no matter how much the solar variation is amplified."

* Foukal 2006 concludes "The variations measured from spacecraft since 1978 are too small to have contributed appreciably to accelerated global warming over the past 30 years."

* Scafetta 2006 says "since 1975 global warming has occurred much faster than could be reasonably expected from the sun alone."

* Usoskin 2005 conclude "during these last 30 years the solar total irradiance, solar UV irradiance and cosmic ray flux has not shown any significant secular trend, so that at least this most recent warming episode must have another source."

* Solanki 2004 reconstructs 11,400 years of sunspot numbers using radiocarbon concentrations, finding "solar variability is unlikely to have been the dominant cause of the strong warming during the past three decades".

* Haigh 2003 says "Observational data suggest that the Sun has influenced temperatures on decadal, centennial and millennial time-scales, but radiative forcing considerations and the results of energy-balance models and general circulation models suggest that the warming during the latter part of the 20th century cannot be ascribed entirely to solar effects."

* Stott 2003 increased climate model sensitivity to solar forcing and still found "most warming over the last 50 yr is likely to have been caused by increases in greenhouse gases."

* Solanki 2003 concludes "the Sun has contributed less than 30% of the global warming since 1970".

* Lean 1999 concludes "it is unlikely that Sun–climate relationships can account for much of the warming since 1970".

* Waple 1999 finds "little evidence to suggest that changes in irradiance are having a large impact on the current warming trend."

* Frolich 1998 concludes "solar radiative output trends contributed little of the 0.2°C increase in the global mean surface temperature in the past decade"

 

Can you cite one to support your argument?

[Br8inend]

There's a 33. Year oscillation between warming in the northern hemisphere and southern hemisphere . this with the high activity of the sun caused the warming between 1980 and 1998. what climate scientists omit to include is that ice at the south pole has actually increased over the last 30years or so.......

The proof is in the pudding , record snows last year, and seen as I'm always right in the end, I predict winters worse than the 70's over the next 3 years.......

 

Note the date of this last post, before the bad weather came. Why am I always right?

[Wildcat]

Note the date of this last post, before the bad weather came. Why am I always right?

 

You are wrong about antarctic ice increasing.

 

It has been in steady decline on land, here has been an increase in the sea ice, despite the Souther ocean warming faster than other parts of the sea, for a variety of reasons including the drop in ozone levels over Antarctica, causing stratospheric cooling, cyclonic winds and polynyas that create sea ice. Another contributor is changes in ocean circulation. The Southern Ocean consists of a layer of cold water near the surface and a layer of warmer water below. Water from the warmer layer rises up to the surface, melting sea ice. However, as air temperatures warm, the amount of rain and snowfall also increases. This freshens the surface waters, leading to a surface layer less dense than the saltier, warmer water below. The layers become more stratified and mix less. Less heat is transported upwards from the deeper, warmer layer. Hence less sea ice is melted.

 

You can look at a more full explanation here, including links to research papers that back up the points.

 

http://www.skepticalscience.com/antarctica-gaining-ice.htm

 

As for the oscillation you are talking about I assume you mean the North Atlantic Oscillation?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Atlantic_oscillation

[Br8inend]

You are wrong about antarctic ice increasing.

 

It has been in steady decline on land, here has been an increase in the sea ice, despite the Souther ocean warming faster than other parts of the sea, for a variety of reasons including the drop in ozone levels over Antarctica, causing stratospheric cooling, cyclonic winds and polynyas that create sea ice. Another contributor is changes in ocean circulation. The Southern Ocean consists of a layer of cold water near the surface and a layer of warmer water below. Water from the warmer layer rises up to the surface, melting sea ice. However, as air temperatures warm, the amount of rain and snowfall also increases. This freshens the surface waters, leading to a surface layer less dense than the saltier, warmer water below. The layers become more stratified and mix less. Less heat is transported upwards from the deeper, warmer layer. Hence less sea ice is melted.

 

You can look at a more full explanation here, including links to research papers that back up the points.

 

http://www.skepticalscience.com/antarctica-gaining-ice.htm

 

As for the oscillation you are talking about I assume you mean the North Atlantic Oscillation?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Atlantic_oscillation

 

That's why new zealand has observerd icebergs floating past , the first time in 45 years.

How many thermometers are there in antarctica?

I'm sure the unscientific climate scientists in east anglia will tell you........

[Br8inend]

You are wrong about antarctic ice increasing.

 

It has been in steady decline on land, here has been an increase in the sea ice, despite the Souther ocean warming faster than other parts of the sea, for a variety of reasons including the drop in ozone levels over Antarctica, causing stratospheric cooling, cyclonic winds and polynyas that create sea ice. Another contributor is changes in ocean circulation. The Southern Ocean consists of a layer of cold water near the surface and a layer of warmer water below. Water from the warmer layer rises up to the surface, melting sea ice. However, as air temperatures warm, the amount of rain and snowfall also increases. This freshens the surface waters, leading to a surface layer less dense than the saltier, warmer water below. The layers become more stratified and mix less. Less heat is transported upwards from the deeper, warmer layer. Hence less sea ice is melted.

 

You can look at a more full explanation here, including links to research papers that back up the points.

 

http://www.skepticalscience.com/antarctica-gaining-ice.htm

 

As for the oscillation you are talking about I assume you mean the North Atlantic Oscillation?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Atlantic_oscillation

 

When the north pole warms the south pole cools and vice versa . On average every 33. Years.

Sunspot activity is linked to climate for example the Dalton and maunder minimum. Sunspot activity has also been linked to increase's in volcanic activity here on earth though the mechanisms remain to be understood.

Over the last 2 years the sun has been very quiet leading some to predict another Dalton minimum and possibly a maunder minimum.

 

I get my info from here- http://www.bautforum.com

[Wildcat]

That's why new zealand has observerd icebergs floating past , the first time in 45 years.

How many thermometers are there in antarctica?

I'm sure the unscientific climate scientists in east anglia will tell you........

 

It is indeed why Antarctica has seen an increase in sea ice at that same time as the Southern Ocean has been warming faster than elsewhere.

 

I have no idea how many thermometers there are in Antarctica. It is not really very relevant when the temperature readings are being taken by the GRACE satellites.