So, Some Scientists Predict a Coming Mini-Ice Age....

JimBowie1958

Old Fogey
Sep 25, 2011
63,590
16,756
2,220
There is no consensus that Human activity drove the warming from 1900 to 1998. It only exists among Western scientists, who are now the second tier scientists in the world, behind Russia and China, apparently.

Cold sun rising - The Nation


The sun will go into "hibernation" mode around 2030, and it has already started to get sleepy. At the Royal Astronomical Society's annual meeting in July, Professor Valentina Zharkova of Northumbria University in the UK confirmed it - the sun will begin its Maunder Minimum (Grand Solar Minimum) in 15 years. Other scientists had suggested years ago that this change was imminent, but Zharkova's model is said to have near-perfect accuracy.

So what is a "solar minimum"?

Our sun doesn't maintain a constant intensity. Instead, it cycles in spans of approximately 11 years. When it's at its maximum, it has the highest number of sunspots on its surface in that particular cycle. When it's at its minimum, it has almost none. When there are more sunspots, the sun is brighter. When there are fewer, the sun radiates less heat toward Earth.

But that's not the only cooling effect of a solar minimum. A dim sun doesn't deflect cosmic rays away from Earth as efficiently as a bright sun. So, when these rays enter our atmosphere, they seed clouds, which in turn cool our planet even more and increase precipitation in the form of rain, snow and hail. ...

Around 2000, the PDO Index started to blow cold again, possibly causing global warming to "pause", as the mainstream scientists describe it. IPCC-affiliated scientists as well as Nasa and the NOAA attribute the pause to other factors. This is when the plot thickens.

Solar cycle 24 - two cycles prior the cycle that's expected to bottom out into a Maunder Minimum - was weak. In 2013-14 it reached its maximum far below average. Meanwhile extreme cold-weather anomalies have occurred around the world. Last year "polar vortices" slammed into the central US and Siberia as a third hovered over the Atlantic. All 50 US states, including Hawaii, had temperatures below freezing for the first time in recorded history. Snowfall records were broken in cities in the US, Canada, Italy, New Zealand, Australia, Japan and elsewhere. Southern American states and central Mexico, where snow is rare, got heavy snow, as did the Middle East.

This past summer the cold didn't let up, with more temperature records across the US and rare summer snows seen in Canada, the US and China. Birds have migrated early in the last two years. Antarctic sea ice set a new record in 2013 and it was broken again in 2014.

Not even Thailand was immune. In 2014 Bangkok hit its coldest low in 30 years, while 63 lives were lost in the North.

Scientists at the Climate and Environmental Physics and Oeschger Centre for Climate Change Research at the University of Berne in Switzerland have recently backed up theories that support the sun's importance in determining the climate on Earth. A paper published last year by the American Meteorological Society contradicts claims by IPCC scientists that the sun couldn't be responsible for major shifts in climate. Judith Curry, chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology, rejected IPCC assertions that solar variations don't matter. Among the many studies and authorities she cited was the National Research Council's recent report "The Effects of Solar Variability on Earth's Climate".

Other researchers and organisations are also predicting global cooling - the Russian Academy of Science, the Astronomical Institute of the Slovak Academy of Scientists, the Institute of Terrestrial Magnetism Russia, Victor Manuel Velesco Herrera at the National University of Mexico, the Bulgarian Institute of Astronomy, Dr Tim Patterson at Carleton University in Canada, Drs Lin Zhen at Nanjing University in China, just to name a few.

For now nevertheless, the IPCC and other authoritative agencies are sticking to their CO2-dominant climate-forcing theory. They attribute the cold spells to a disruption in the jet stream caused by Anthropogenic Global Warming. Some of their theories have heads being scratched, for instance the "pause" in global warming they attribute to heat being absorbed deep into the oceans. When Antarctic ice reached record levels in 2013, scientists were "baffled" because the water beneath the ice was warm, they claimed. In climate science old and new, nothing is certain.
 
seems there is a river of hail running through Arabia

Not quite what some would call global warming.

Earth’s extreme weather gets more extreme: river of hail runs through Arabian Desert

Mother nature has a sense of humor

Well that j ust proves that we have had even more Climate Change than we thought we have had!

/sarc


Anthropic Climate Change is a tautology and now it is even contradicted by all the available evidence that matters.


Two years ago Israel had wild snow storm and gaza flooded.

wild weather is more normal than most people realize.
 
We have abused the air, land and water, but I think mother nature is more resilient than we think.

It is good that we are making changes, but I doubt we did all the "damage" nor that we can repair the damage.

Nature will do most of that, but we should still help.

We should be concerned with over population. Slowing that will do more that more technology.

Lack of fresh water is a major concern.
 
My father died about ten years ago at the age of 90, and in his last several years was dedicated to telling people about the coming ice age and was always stressing that rock dust was the answer, if we would just spread it all around the earth. I didn't believe in it then although I have wondered about it many times since then. I don't remember if he was part of a group, but he got the idea from John Hamaker.

John D. Hamaker - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In Paul Kelbie's article Remineralization Might Save Us From Global Warming,[54] in The Independent, he wrote that since the last ice age, three million years ago, the Earth has gone through 25 glaciations, each lasting about 90,000 years, and that we are now 10,800 years into an interglacial – a hiatus between ice–ages. Previous interglacials averaged 10 to 12,000 years in duration, with the most significant environmental change being interglacial soil demineralization and retrogressive vegetational succession.[55] Since this meant modern soils were relatively barren, leading to the adoption of imbalanced and artificial fertilisers, it was SEER’s belief that by "By spreading the dust, we are doing in minutes what the earth takes thousands of years to do – putting essential minerals in the rocks back into the earth." SEER won funding from the Scottish Executive to conduct the UK’s first official rock dust trials, and maintained that rock dust could fight climate change because calcium and magnesium in the dust converts carbon in the air into carbonates, in addition to enhanced biosequestration by soil organisms and vegetation. The theory captured the attention of NASA who were researching the growing of plants on other planets.
 
seems there is a river of hail running through Arabia

Not quite what some would call global warming.

Earth’s extreme weather gets more extreme: river of hail runs through Arabian Desert

Mother nature has a sense of humor

Well that j ust proves that we have had even more Climate Change than we thought we have had!

/sarc


Anthropic Climate Change is a tautology and now it is even contradicted by all the available evidence that matters.


Two years ago Israel had wild snow storm and gaza flooded.

wild weather is more normal than most people realize.
didn't noah build a boat because of extreme weather? Way before automobiles I think.
 
Over the last 35 years the sun has shown a slight cooling trend. However global temperatures have been increasing. Since the sun and climate are going in opposite directions scientists conclude the sun cannot be the cause of recent global warming.

The only way to blame the sun for the current rise in temperatures is by cherry picking the data. This is done by showing only past periods when sun and climate move together and ignoring the last few decades when the two are moving in opposite directions.

Sun & climate: moving in opposite directions
 
Over the last 35 years the sun has shown a slight cooling trend. However global temperatures have been increasing. Since the sun and climate are going in opposite directions scientists conclude the sun cannot be the cause of recent global warming.

The only way to blame the sun for the current rise in temperatures is by cherry picking the data. This is done by showing only past periods when sun and climate move together and ignoring the last few decades when the two are moving in opposite directions.

Sun & climate: moving in opposite directions


Flares and sun spot might effect us but it's not permanent.

The sun still have few billion years of fuel so a fluctuation is natural. Now if we could store the energy from just one day of sun light we would be able to fuel the world for a year.

Instead of harmful freons for our remigration and AC, there are not solar powered coolers that are not harmful to the environment. They are being used for outdoor markets and areas in Africa or disaster zones where medicines and food need to be preserved now but could become something for homes in the near future. There are portable solar powered AC for tent as well. Solar stoves, solar showers, solar generators for electricity, solar battery chargers, solar water desalinization, and even water powered batteries. Indoor lighting of huts, sheds and homes during the day in places with no electricity is as easy as an empty soda bottle. Green houses for food and even homes can be made from soda bottles.
 
OK.....let me get this straight..........so, lets spend the next few years trying to cool off the planet with an approaching epic bitter cold that's gonna last a couple of decades!!:funnyface:

That would be the thinking of a progressive...........:2up::eusa_dance::eusa_dance:
 
Over the last 35 years the sun has shown a slight cooling trend. However global temperatures have been increasing. Since the sun and climate are going in opposite directions scientists conclude the sun cannot be the cause of recent global warming.

The only way to blame the sun for the current rise in temperatures is by cherry picking the data. This is done by showing only past periods when sun and climate move together and ignoring the last few decades when the two are moving in opposite directions.

Sun & climate: moving in opposite directions


Flares and sun spot might effect us but it's not permanent.

The sun still have few billion years of fuel so a fluctuation is natural. Now if we could store the energy from just one day of sun light we would be able to fuel the world for a year.

Instead of harmful freons for our remigration and AC, there are not solar powered coolers that are not harmful to the environment. They are being used for outdoor markets and areas in Africa or disaster zones where medicines and food need to be preserved now but could become something for homes in the near future. There are portable solar powered AC for tent as well. Solar stoves, solar showers, solar generators for electricity, solar battery chargers, solar water desalinization, and even water powered batteries. Indoor lighting of huts, sheds and homes during the day in places with no electricity is as easy as an empty soda bottle. Green houses for food and even homes can be made from soda bottles.

The cycle of sunspot is reflective of the amount energy the sun produces. The Maunder Minimum reflects a time when there was very few sunspots for I think, 80 years. If that happens again most likely the effect will be cooling. I should still be around in the 2030's so hopefully I'll find out.
 
There is no consensus that Human activity drove the warming from 1900 to 1998. It only exists among Western scientists, who are now the second tier scientists in the world, behind Russia and China, apparently.

Cold sun rising - The Nation

The sun will go into "hibernation" mode around 2030, and it has already started to get sleepy. At the Royal Astronomical Society's annual meeting in July, Professor Valentina Zharkova of Northumbria University in the UK confirmed it - the sun will begin its Maunder Minimum (Grand Solar Minimum) in 15 years. Other scientists had suggested years ago that this change was imminent, but Zharkova's model is said to have near-perfect accuracy.

So what is a "solar minimum"?

Our sun doesn't maintain a constant intensity. Instead, it cycles in spans of approximately 11 years. When it's at its maximum, it has the highest number of sunspots on its surface in that particular cycle. When it's at its minimum, it has almost none. When there are more sunspots, the sun is brighter. When there are fewer, the sun radiates less heat toward Earth.

But that's not the only cooling effect of a solar minimum. A dim sun doesn't deflect cosmic rays away from Earth as efficiently as a bright sun. So, when these rays enter our atmosphere, they seed clouds, which in turn cool our planet even more and increase precipitation in the form of rain, snow and hail. ...

Around 2000, the PDO Index started to blow cold again, possibly causing global warming to "pause", as the mainstream scientists describe it. IPCC-affiliated scientists as well as Nasa and the NOAA attribute the pause to other factors. This is when the plot thickens.

Solar cycle 24 - two cycles prior the cycle that's expected to bottom out into a Maunder Minimum - was weak. In 2013-14 it reached its maximum far below average. Meanwhile extreme cold-weather anomalies have occurred around the world. Last year "polar vortices" slammed into the central US and Siberia as a third hovered over the Atlantic. All 50 US states, including Hawaii, had temperatures below freezing for the first time in recorded history. Snowfall records were broken in cities in the US, Canada, Italy, New Zealand, Australia, Japan and elsewhere. Southern American states and central Mexico, where snow is rare, got heavy snow, as did the Middle East.

This past summer the cold didn't let up, with more temperature records across the US and rare summer snows seen in Canada, the US and China. Birds have migrated early in the last two years. Antarctic sea ice set a new record in 2013 and it was broken again in 2014.

Not even Thailand was immune. In 2014 Bangkok hit its coldest low in 30 years, while 63 lives were lost in the North.

Scientists at the Climate and Environmental Physics and Oeschger Centre for Climate Change Research at the University of Berne in Switzerland have recently backed up theories that support the sun's importance in determining the climate on Earth. A paper published last year by the American Meteorological Society contradicts claims by IPCC scientists that the sun couldn't be responsible for major shifts in climate. Judith Curry, chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology, rejected IPCC assertions that solar variations don't matter. Among the many studies and authorities she cited was the National Research Council's recent report "The Effects of Solar Variability on Earth's Climate".

Other researchers and organisations are also predicting global cooling - the Russian Academy of Science, the Astronomical Institute of the Slovak Academy of Scientists, the Institute of Terrestrial Magnetism Russia, Victor Manuel Velesco Herrera at the National University of Mexico, the Bulgarian Institute of Astronomy, Dr Tim Patterson at Carleton University in Canada, Drs Lin Zhen at Nanjing University in China, just to name a few.

For now nevertheless, the IPCC and other authoritative agencies are sticking to their CO2-dominant climate-forcing theory. They attribute the cold spells to a disruption in the jet stream caused by Anthropogenic Global Warming. Some of their theories have heads being scratched, for instance the "pause" in global warming they attribute to heat being absorbed deep into the oceans. When Antarctic ice reached record levels in 2013, scientists were "baffled" because the water beneath the ice was warm, they claimed. In climate science old and new, nothing is certain.
That is just more fraudulent denier cult propaganda, with very little real basis in reality. The OP of this thread is just bogus BS created by denier cult propaganda pushers. The BS story stemmed from a presentation at the Royal Astronomical Society’s National Astronomy Meeting this year in Wales by mathematician Valentina Zharkova. Her research (not yet published at that time) suggested that the sun could be headed for a quiet phase similar to the "Maunder Minimum”, but her research doesn’t say anything about how this solar minimum would impact the Earth’s climate. Get that clear! Neither she nor anybody else at The Royal Society ever said, that the world would get colder. The projected cooling from an extended solar minimum is far less than the global warming over the same period from the increased CO2 levels mankind has created.

No, the sun isn't going to save us from global warming
A solar minimum would offset no more than a decade’s worth of human-caused global warming

The Guardian
Dana Nuccitelli
16 July 2015
(excerpts)
Even the grandest solar minimum would have a minor impact on global temperatures compared to the rapid warming stemming from human carbon pollution. Photograph: Solar Dynamics Observatory/Nasa

A number of scientific studies have asked the question, ‘if the sun were to enter another extended quiet phase (a grand solar minimum), how would that impact global surface temperatures?’. Every study agrees, it would cause no more than 0.3°C cooling, which would only be enough to temporarily offset about a decade’s worth of human-caused global warming.


The global mean temperature difference is shown for the time period 1900 to 2100 for the IPCC A2 emissions scenario. The red line shows predicted temperature change for the current level of solar activity, the blue line shows predicted temperature change for solar activity at the much lower level of the Maunder Minimum, and the black line shows observed temperatures through 2010. Adapted from Feulner & Rahmstorf (2010) by SkepticalScience.com

This ‘impending mini ice age’ myth is incredibly easy to debunk. In fact it just takes asking one simple question – if the sun is such a key driver of the Earth’s climate, then why has the entire planet (air, oceans, land, and ice) warmed rapidly over the past 60 years while solar activity has declined?

Annual global surface temperature change (thin light red) with 11 year moving average of temperature (thick dark red). Temperature from NASA GISS. Annual Total Solar Irradiance (thin light blue) with 11 year moving average of TSI (thick dark blue). Source: Skeptical Science

That simple question is sufficient on its own to debunk the notion that the sun is the main driver of global temperatures. Research has clearly shown, it’s carbon dioxide that’s the temperature’s main control knob.

Second, research has suggested that the solar minimum around the year 1650 played a relatively small role in the cool temperatures during the Little Ice Age. Instead, heightened volcanic activity (pumping ash into the atmosphere that blocks sunlight) and a drop in atmospheric carbon levels were the main contributors to the cooling during that time.


Third, the Little Ice Age wasn’t even that cold, globally. The following chart shows the most comprehensive global surface temperature reconstruction to date, from the PAGES 2k Consortium. In just the past few decades the planet has warmed more than it cooled during the entire Little Ice Age.

87888235-df92-408f-a4e3-76b36a2640e6-620x458.png

Green dots show the 30-year average of the new PAGES 2k reconstruction. The red curve shows the global mean surface temperature, according HadCRUT4 data from 1850 onwards. In blue is the original hockey stick of Mann, Bradley and Hughes (1999) with its uncertainty range (light blue). Graph by Klaus Bitterman. 400 years of sunspot observations are inlaid, created by Robert Rohde.

There was significant regional cooling during the mini ice age, particularly in parts of Europe and North America, but globally it was indeed quite little.

Fourth, a grand solar minimum would be a temporary phase. Any cooling it caused would only last a few decades until the end of the event, at which point the increase in solar activity would contribute to global warming.

In summary, the difference between the Little Ice Age and current warming period comes down to volcanoes, carbon dioxide, and magnitude. The previous cool period was quite small, likely caused mostly by volcanic activity. And of course, humans weren’t pumping over 30 billion tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere every year in the 17th century, as we are now.

The bottom line: even the grandest solar minimum would have a minor impact on global temperatures compared to the rapid warming stemming from human carbon pollution.
 
That is just more fraudulent denier cult propaganda, with very little real basis in reality. The OP of this thread is just bogus BS created by denier cult propaganda pushers. The BS story stemmed from a presentation at the Royal Astronomical Society’s National Astronomy Meeting this year in Wales by mathematician Valentina Zharkova.

No, it is about more than that, in fact it details support for the idea that the sun controls Earth's climate from several different scientific establishments around the world.

Scientists at the Climate and Environmental Physics and Oeschger Centre for Climate Change Research at the University of Berne in Switzerland have recently backed up theories that support the sun's importance in determining the climate on Earth. A paper published last year by the American Meteorological Society contradicts claims by IPCC scientists that the sun couldn't be responsible for major shifts in climate. Judith Curry, chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology, rejected IPCC assertions that solar variations don't matter. Among the many studies and authorities she cited was the National Research Council's recent report "The Effects of Solar Variability on Earth's Climate".

Other researchers and organisations are also predicting global cooling - the Russian Academy of Science, the Astronomical Institute of the Slovak Academy of Scientists, the Institute of Terrestrial Magnetism Russia, Victor Manuel Velesco Herrera at the National University of Mexico, the Bulgarian Institute of Astronomy, Dr Tim Patterson at Carleton University in Canada, Drs Lin Zhen at Nanjing University in China, just to name a few.


Lol, it is apparent you did not even read the damned thing.
 
That is just more fraudulent denier cult propaganda, with very little real basis in reality. The OP of this thread is just bogus BS created by denier cult propaganda pushers. The BS story stemmed from a presentation at the Royal Astronomical Society’s National Astronomy Meeting this year in Wales by mathematician Valentina Zharkova.

No, it is about more than that, in fact it details support for the idea that the sun controls Earth's climate from several different scientific establishments around the world.

Scientists at the Climate and Environmental Physics and Oeschger Centre for Climate Change Research at the University of Berne in Switzerland have recently backed up theories that support the sun's importance in determining the climate on Earth. A paper published last year by the American Meteorological Society contradicts claims by IPCC scientists that the sun couldn't be responsible for major shifts in climate. Judith Curry, chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology, rejected IPCC assertions that solar variations don't matter. Among the many studies and authorities she cited was the National Research Council's recent report "The Effects of Solar Variability on Earth's Climate".

Other researchers and organisations are also predicting global cooling - the Russian Academy of Science, the Astronomical Institute of the Slovak Academy of Scientists, the Institute of Terrestrial Magnetism Russia, Victor Manuel Velesco Herrera at the National University of Mexico, the Bulgarian Institute of Astronomy, Dr Tim Patterson at Carleton University in Canada, Drs Lin Zhen at Nanjing University in China, just to name a few.


Lol, it is apparent you did not even read the damned thing.
More denier cult BS.

The plain fact is that solar activity has been declining for decades while temperatures on Earth have increased. While no one in the climate science community would deny that that sun is providing the energy that powers our climate processes, the solar energy reaching the Earth varies very, very little, and those slight changes in solar output are not the main controlling factor driving the changes in the Earth's climate over the ages....the main factor is indeed the variations in CO2 levels in the Earth's atmosphere, caused in the past by natural factors, and caused now by the enormous amounts of previously sequestered fossil carbon that mankind has burned off into the atmosphere. That is the firm conclusion of the world's experts on this subject.
 

Forum List

Back
Top