Thursday, January 17, 2013

New paper finds solar cycle changes Earth temperature

A paper published today in the Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics finds a significant influence of solar activity upon Earth temperature during the second half of the 20th century. The authors find surface temperature linked to the 11-year solar cycle, and also influenced by the timing of volcanic eruptions. Once again, the claim by climate alarmists that small variations in solar activity cannot control temperature or climate has been debunked by observations.
Global distribution of stations used by this study
Fig. 2. Variations of external factors: (top panel) solar activity (SSN) and the C9-index of geomagnetic activity (dimensionless index); (bottom panel) variations of DVIGlobal (dimensionless index) and the aerosol backscattering coefficients (View the MathML source) at wavelength 694.3 nm. The solid vertical lines indicate the dates of intensive volcanic eruptions (Volcanic Explosive Index (VEI 5.0) for 1880–1991.
Fig. 3. Examples of wavelet spectra of temperature variations for four chosen stations.
Added commentary: The 11-year solar cycle periodicity is shown by the dark orange roughly horizontal bands corresponding to the 11-year solar cycle [period in years indicated on vertical axis]

External forcing on air-surface temperature: Geographical distribution of sensitive climate zones

  • CEREGE (UMR7330), Collège de France, CNRS, Université Aix-Marseille, IRD; Europôle de l'Arbois – BP 80, 13545 Aix-en-Provence Cedex 4, France

Abstract

In this paper we analyze the geographical distribution of the climate response to external forcing (solar, volcanic and geomagnetic) on the periods of 11 and 22 years. As a climate characteristic we use the data of the air-surface temperature (regional data sets). The analysis is performed by the wavelet phase/coherence technique which is applied to the solar (sunspot numbers), volcanic (Dust Veil Index), geomagnetic (C9-index) activities and the temperature data on interannual timescales for the common time interval covering most of the 20th century. Besides, we analyze the statistics of the temperature response to the solar and geomagnetic factors on the periods of 11 and 22 years for different geographical sectors. In particular, we find the existence of a combined forcing of solar and volcanic activity on the Earth temperature on the 11-year period in the second half of the 20th century over the globe, whereas a set of stations (mostly in North Atlantic) shows a coherence between solar activity and the Earth temperature on the 11-year periodicity even in absence of the combined effect; it was found that the maximal number of stations demonstrating statistically significant amplitudes of wavelet spectra corresponds to the wavelet cross coherence between geomagnetic activity and the Earth air-surface temperature on the periods about 22 years during the time interval without intensive volcanic eruptions capable to change significantly the level of DVIGlobal.

8 comments:

  1. Of course Solar activity affects climate, and can do so even via cosmic rays which may affect cloud formation. Solar activity itself is timed by planetary orbits which can affect the Sun via magnetic and maybe even gravitational fields.

    This is why it is all natural - not anthropogenic ...

    The automatic development of a vertical thermal gradient (AKA "lapse rate") in any atmosphere in a gravitational field has been confirmed by over 800 experiments since 2002. It happens at the molecular level, regardless of the surface temperature or the amount of convection. Details are in "Planetary Surface Temperatures. A Discussion of Alternative Mechanisms."

    This autonomous "lapse rate" fully explains that "33 degrees of warming" without any need for any greenhouse effect.

    All should read this comment by, Geoff Wood, qualified in astrophysics.

    http://www.drroyspencer.com/2013/01/waste-heat-as-a-contributor-to-observed-warming/#comment-68988

    The following are excerpts ..

    As Doug has said about a dozen times, gravity modifies the mean free path between collisions. That is ‘every’ upward, ‘every’ downward ‘every’ sideways, ‘every’, ‘every’ free molecular path between collisions is modified. Therefore it is impossible for the modified ‘collisions’ that result, not to impart the gravitational ‘information’ into the macroscopic development of the gravitational thermal profile. This is the ‘diffusion’ process.

    At this point, we have a reasonable depiction of the thermal profile of ANY atmosphere. FROM BASIC PHYSICS.

    Given a simple reason why any atmosphere tends towards this isentropic profile as depicted and described by entry level physics, why would anyone look for a more complicated reason to explain what we already know!


    The point which Geoff and I make is that the "33 degrees of warming" supposedly caused by water vapour and carbon dioxide etc was already there due to the effect of gravity on the atmosphere. This happens on all planets, and also fully explains why the poles of Venus are over 720K, even though they receive less than 1W/m^2 of direct insolation from the Sun. For more detail read my article "The 21st Century New Paradigm Shift in Climate Change Science" easily found with Google. I've also recorded an introductory 10 minute video here http://youtu.be/r8YbyfqUvfY



    ReplyDelete
  2. There are many things that drive temperature. Climate deniers want you to believe there is only one cause, so if they point to anything else that has an impact you're supposed to believe that CO2 cannot. Problem is that after about 1975 TSI and global temperature diverge. A quick google and you can see for yourself.

    C02 and temp are intertwined. CO2 causes warming. In the rare cases where the temp rises first, the oceans loose solubility of C02 which releases more C02 which then drives further warming. Check the graph of CO2 vs temp. Be sure to make sure it is current and not some denier page that ends at 1950. Now ask yourself if you really believe that for the first time in 300,000 years the two aren't intertwined.

    Solar output vs temp
    http://www.skepticalscience.com/images/Temp_vs_TSI_2009.gif

    CO2 vs Temp
    http://www.wunderground.com/hurricane/2010/antarctic_icecoreT.gif

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 1. "climate deniers" is hate speech & not allowed on this site. Read the comment policy.

      2. http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2013/01/paper-shows-solar-activity-at-end-of.html shows TSI at a grand maximum at end of 20th century

      3. Temps can continue to rise even if TSI remains stable
      http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/01/09/commitment-studies-belie-consensus-claim-that-a-persistent-high-level-of-temperature-forcing-cannot-cause-continued-warming/

      4. Sunspot integral & ocean oscillations explain temp changes much better than CO2
      http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2010/01/climate-modeling-ocean-oscillations.html

      5. Temperature leads CO2 by 800+ years in the ice cores. The cause cannot follow the effect.

      Delete
    2. More graphs showing the TSI grand maximum near the end of the 20th century. Note also, solar effects have a long lag time due to the huge heat capacity of the ocean

      http://www.biocab.org/Comparison_TT-CO2-Solar_Irradiance.jpg

      http://www.ukssdc.ac.uk/wdcc1/papers/grlfig4.gif

      http://www.climate4you.com/images/SolarIrradianceReconstructedSince1610.gif

      http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/60/Solar_Activity_Proxies.png/300px-Solar_Activity_Proxies.png

      http://www.biocab.org/Extrapolated_TSI.jpg

      http://lasp.colorado.edu/sorce/total_solar_irradiance_plots/tim_tsi_reconstruction_2012.jpeg

      http://www.ukssdc.ac.uk/wdcc1/papers/grlfig5.gif

      Delete
    3. "The cause cannot follow the effect" is simply not true. Nobody is denying that warming temperatures increase the release of C02 from the oceans. And the most scientific of the skeptic crowd is not denying C02 raises temperature (their skepticism relates to "how much" it affects warming). The skeptics even have to accept that both are true: warming causes increase in CO2 and while also an increase in CO2 causes warming. Think of like the stock market. If public sentiment falls, the market value falls which in turn causes sentiment to decline even further. It doesn't matter which comes first. In science it's referred to as a "Feedback loop".

      Delete
    4. If CO2 caused a positive feedback loop, the Earth would have incinerated billions of years ago. The climate is dominated by negative, not positive feedback loops which explains the cyclical nature of climate.

      http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/01/30/co2-temperatures-and-ice-ages/

      Delete
  3. Not only is climate effected by solar variations, but volcanic activity is effected by solar activity. Volcanism is a secondary efffect of solar and cosmic ray particle variations. Volcanism is somewhat self-damping as the internal heat is offset with gases and ahs which increase albedo. Large portions of todays science are now based on a false paradigm. See "Becoming a TOTAL Earth Science Skeptic" for a summary of just some of the Faux Science scams.

    ReplyDelete
  4. http://www.issw.ch/info/mitarbeitende/frank/Raspopov_etal_PPP_2008.pdf

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.