Sunday
Yesterday I did a posting here about climate, but I hope I will be forgiven for another one today on the same general subject. This one is because, in connection with yesterday's posting, a commenter copied and pasted this story from Canada, which can be summarised briefly as: Canada is going to have a very cold winter.
I was not surprised by this news, even though many Canadians perhaps are. This is because, ever since doing this posting here a month ago, the notion mentioned at the end of it as hardly more than an afterthought has stuck in my mind. Here is how that posting of a month ago, mostly about giant diggers, ended:
In further interesting environment-related speculations Bishop Hill ...
Yes, that Bishop Hill again.
... reckons we may be due for a cold winter, on account of the sun taking a bit of a rest just now. Interesting. We shall see.
Maybe now we are seeing. Maybe. What impressed me about this prophecy, unlike so many others in the climate change rack ... , er, field, is that this one had a time frame attached. It concerned this winter. This winter is going to be cold.
Since I am on the subject of cold weather, let me mention another prophecy, also of cold weather to come, also because of the behaviour of the sun, also reported in Canada. Take a look this piece from a few weeks back, about the work of a man called Rhodes Fairbridge. Fairbridge, we learn, explained what causes the sun to influence the earth's climate in different ways at different times. It is all to do with the alignment of the planets, and consequently the degree to which the sun is close to or quite far from the centre of gravity of the solar system. No, I do not understand that very well either.
What interested me about the article was not that it made any particular sense to me. It did not, and I am in no position to pronounce on its scientific merit or content, which could very well be zero for all I know. No, what caught my attention was that there was, once again, a prediction being made, with some dates attached to it.
The sun's own orbit, he found, has eight characteristic patterns, all determined by Jupiter's position relative to Saturn, with the other planets playing much lesser roles. Some of these eight have orderly orbits, smooth and near-circular. During such orbits, solar activity is high and Earth heats up. Some of the eight orbits are chaotic, taking a loop-the-loop path. These orbits correspond to quiet times for the sun, and cool periods on Earth. Every 179 years or so, the sun embarks on a new cycle of orbits. One of the cooler periods in recent centuries was the Little Ice Age of the 17th century, when the Thames River in London froze over each winter. The next cool period, if the pattern holds, began in 1996, with the effects to be felt starting in 2010. Some predict three decades of severe cold.
In a few months we will know whether this winter that we are embarking upon now was cold, or not. And in a decade we will know whether it has got much colder generally, or not.
Ever since that prize ass Ehrlich made such a prize ass of himself by putting a date to his silly prediction about all of India starving - by 1980 was it? - the greenies have been noticeably reluctant to say just when their preferred catastrophes will happen. They have contented themselves with saying that if we act before it is too late, and impose all the taxes and controls and restrictions that they crave, all might yet be well, while omitting to specify by what date it will be too late to avert catastrophe. Well, it turns out that someone from the other side of the argument has more recently been putting his neck on the block by naming some dates.
If by the beginning of next summer I have forgotten all about how cold it either was or was not during the winter, not just in Canada but everywhere, somebody remind me about it. If no further mention is made at Samizdata for the next decade of this prediction of a longer cold spell, ditto. If by 2015 it is getting a lot hotter, then let this sunspotter be made to stew in his prediction, albeit posthumously, and let his followers ("Some predict ...") be made to stew unposthumously, just as Ehrlich has been made to suffer for his error, even if (as I am sure commenters will be queueing up to say) not enough.
The irony is that if the weather does get colder, or even if it merely fails to get any hotter, the Global Warming people will surely revise their models to include the activity of the sun, and assure us that had it not been for us being temporarily rescued by our home star, we would all have stewed to death, and that in another 179 years, we still will. Unless by then we have brought capitalism to a shuddering halt and put them in charge of the world blah blah blah, etc. etc.. Well, as I say, we shall see.
As a recovering astrophysicist (primarily fluids but also a fair bit of solar-system dynamics) why is my forehead resting almost on the keyboard in a combination of relief and despair. The idea that our star and the solar system is not a factor is beyond my comprehension.
Thanks Brian!
PS. Thanks for pointing out the lack of specificity of the AGW claims. I have been accusing them of this for ages.
Posted by Nick M at December 2, 2007 11:02 PM
The really odd thing about the sun is, it is responsible for a dirunal temperature range of anything up to 100 degrees at extremes.
But it couldn't possibly - ever in a million years, be responsible for a fraction of a degree over a century.
Odd, don't you think
Posted by APL at December 2, 2007 11:12 PM
Climate change reminds me of the 18th century. Back then, everyone with spare time and a bit of money was rushing out to buy a microscope or a few flasks, and fiddling about until they came up with an exciting new theory of natural philosophy. They'd then laboriously land a perwrite this up with meticulous drawings and details, and take it to some society or other where they'd get involved in a heated slagging match with those gentlemen who had come up with a differing theory. None of them really had a clue what they were measuring, what they were doing, or what it all meant.
I find the idea of po faced theorists pompously challenging each other over their pet theories rather amusing:
"Your ridiculous anthropomorphic theories will be disproved sir, and soon the world will see the sense in my much acclaimed Solar Activity Theory, for through this admirable Theory I predict this year a first frost before St Swithin's day!" [much jeering]
"You may predict all you wish! I do not approach my Theory in the manner of a passing Gypsy or Fortune Teller [much jeering]. No sir! Only a fool could fail to see the repeatedly demonstrated link between the burning of coal in our great cities, and the increasing height of the mercury!" [much jeering]
What's clear is that a lot of scientists are spending a lot of time measuring things. I'm sure sooner or later some actual truth may emerge.
It's a sobering thought that we achieved the knowledge required to walk on the moon several years before we achieved the knowledge required to explain where mountains came from. Perhaps we will walk on Mars before we understand where temperature and rainfall trends come from.
Posted by J at December 2, 2007 11:23 PM
Well, I can see that my .02cents worth is not worth a plugged nickle...excuse mre for interupting.
Posted by Ken at December 3, 2007 12:09 AM
The Sun is NOT the center of our solar system. We should not be as surprised as we are, because even our Earth-moon system revolves around a common center of gravity, which is not in the Earth's crust. The barycenter, the hypothetical fulcrum point for our Solar System, is the actual center. It has a hand in the Solar Cycle (11 or 22 years).
And did anyone else catch the news that the Austrian Ski season this november started off much better because of more snow than last year? Cool Britannia indeed!
Posted by nick G at December 3, 2007 05:29 AM
I suspect you planned this, Brian, but when I got to the part about climate being affected by "the alignment of the planets," I involuntarily rolled my eyes.
But I read the linked article, and the more I think about it, the more believable it seems. As the planets orbit, the Sun's orbit transitions from a smooth two-body orbit around it and a point roughly in the direction of Jupiter, and a tight, chaotic, many-body orbit about a point often inside the sun itself. It is quite plausible that this could affect the Sun's fluid dynamics, magneto dynamics, and gravitational confinement -- and thus the efficiency of the fusion process.
Here (pdf) is a much more detailed description of the Fairbridge hypothesis. Fascinating, actually.
Posted by ArtD0dger at December 3, 2007 07:14 AM
The Russian Academy of Science has been forecasting a cold winter here since the summer too. Also for solar activity reasons. So far it is considerably colder than last year was.
Posted by jb at December 3, 2007 10:40 AM
As far as the future is concerned, and what the effects of CO2 in decades to come will be unless we all sacrifice the health and wellbeing of our future virgin daughters on the altar of Gore - I have been waiting for someone amongst the technophiles who haunt this site to comment on these -
http://www.fusor.net/board/view.php?site=fusor&bn=fusor_announce&key=1143684406
http://www.science.edu/TechoftheYear/TechoftheYear.htm
http://advancednano.blogspot.com/2007/08/bussard-fusion-may-be-funded.html
http://emc2fusion.org/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polywell
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1996321846673788606
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Bussard
And Dale, as a related issue - a consequence of the technology; surely you have come across this, or something related to it -
http://advancednano.blogspot.com/2007/11/fusion-propulsion-if-bussard-iec-fusion.html
This looks to be serious stuff, and if it is true it will stuff all those most stuffworthy - The Saudi and Iranian power structures, the IPCC, Greenpeace, Guardian journalists (snigger), Peter Garrett.
Anyone with a knowledge of atomic physics greater than mine care to comment? It really would render this months carbonfest in Bali moot. And we wouldn't give a toss about carbon permits. The ecowhackos might even be right about the effects of CO2, but no one would give a stuff.
Posted by countingcats at December 3, 2007 10:51 AM
Well, the predictions are not so hard. It's all because of the girl baby Jesus.
No, don't look at me like that. That's what it's called, or rather, El Niño (the boy child) has changed to its opposite La Niña (the girl child), and while the former brings warm weather, the latter brings cold. The name originates from the warm ocean current associated with El Niño usually being noticed just before Christmas.
At the same time, the Pacific Decadal Oscillation looks like it might be flipping into its cold phase. It's a bit hard to tell because the data is so noisy, you have to smooth it over 5-10 years to even see the thing. (The graph on the linked page has only a 2-year smooth, so it's a bit indistinct.) The PDO has a major effect on US and Canadian weather.
The girl baby Jesus is going to bring Christmassy cold weather over the next six to eighteen months, and if the PDO is flipping, then that will bring cooling over the next twenty to thirty years. Incidentally, the cooling period from 1950 to 1980 that caused the glowball warmenists such consternation to explain? - coincided with the last PDO cold phase.
Nobody knows what causes ENSO or the PDO (or many of the other climate oscillations). The computer models don't reproduce them. As ArtD0dger's link says, correlations have been seen between PDO and its friends and the solar cycles, but it's too early in the race yet to put all your money on one horse. The solar hypothesis is very young yet, and not the only alternative to CO2.
Posted by Pa Annoyed at December 3, 2007 11:07 AM
The computer models don't reproduce them.
The computer models, individually and in aggregate, don't reflect the real world.
We are ruled by idiots.
Posted by countingcats at December 3, 2007 11:37 AM
What makes you think that a cold winter won't be taken as proof of global warming ?
Do you remember the scare about droughts, when you had the reservoir's reserves, or lack thereof, in the papers every day ? Funnily enough, it is hardly mentioned now because it is floods that will do it for us it seems.
Whatever the weather (rain/no rain, cold/hot, whatever), it is due to global warming.
So we are screwed. We are SCREWED you hear !?!?!
I think I will have a lie down.
Posted by Pascal at December 3, 2007 11:46 AM
Ken, don't get down. You can participate. Here's how.
All of you fascist global warming denying scum should be shot. what are you all going to deny next, the holocaust? Thousands of scientist agree.....
there you go Ken. if you haven't the slightest, there's a few names to use, speak of the "consensus", and drowning polar bears go far as well.
Posted by spidly at December 3, 2007 12:22 PM
The late Dr Theodor Landscheidt predicted the last 4 el Nino phenomena spot on, years ahead of time based on the solar cycle. some of his papers, such as (this one) are still available on the late John-Daly's website (http://www.john-daly.com/)
Dr Landscheidt also predicted that the year 2030 will be the low point of mini ice age conditions, so if he is right (and he has been spot on with the el nino's) then we are heading for a very cold few decades.
Of course the Global Warming fraternity have their "heads I win tails you lose" spin all ready because if it gets colder it will also be due to CO2, or the interuption of the thermo-haline cycle or not enough virgins sacrificed.
Posted by Steven Groeneveld at December 3, 2007 12:47 PM
Here's today's story from Canada's Globe and Mail:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20071203.wweather03/BNStory/National/home
Posted by tranio at December 3, 2007 05:29 PM
And did anyone else catch the news that the Austrian Ski season this november started off much better because of more snow than last year?
Well, I caught the news, and went there, and had a wonderful ski week, with perfect snow and ski conditions, and temps down to -10 degrees (C).
Posted by Jacob at December 3, 2007 10:54 PM
Dec. 3 in Montreal, nice little snowstorm, 19 Farenheit, 12 inches of snow in the last 18 hours. We have been 10/12 degrees under the norm for a while. It hasn't been this cold, this early in the season in a while.
Posted by Alain at December 3, 2007 11:14 PM
Drat. I don't like cold weather. Now I'll have to get a second job so I can buy a Hummer.
Which do you suppose will warm things up faster - diesel or gasoline?
Posted by CFM at December 4, 2007 05:14 AM
Boy and Howdy Canada's starting cold... we can tell down here in Texas where we get all their air. Every time there's a norther here this fall, it feels like you're being shredded by ice crystals. I swear we've already had two 'blue northers' this week, where over the past decade we don't get them until January for the most part.
Posted by Russ at December 4, 2007 04:23 PM
