Global January-March Temperatures Plummeting Over the Past Decade

ScreenHunter_137 Apr. 12 11.15

This corresponds with the near record high snow extent in the Northern Hemisphere

ScreenHunter_138 Apr. 12 11.17

For some reason, Trenberth forgot to mention this to the audience yesterday.

About these ads

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to Global January-March Temperatures Plummeting Over the Past Decade

  1. Gail Combs says:

    Thanks for showing that Steve.

    I have always thought it would be the time around the equinoxes that would be the most indicative of changing climate.

    I notice a certain physicist from Stanford U was doing his usual misdirection over at WUWT on a paper on Cosmic Ray/cloud formation.

    His points are:

    1. TSI has never changed beyond the 0.01% in the 11 year cycle. (Ignore solar wind, EUV & UV)
    2. Global Temperature has not changed.
    3. The paper** you cite is out of date.
    4. We are going to ‘Adjust’ those records (Sunspot, 10 Be)… HMMMmmmm

    The paper** was A History of Solar Activity over Millennia It is worth the read because
    1. It validates the initial work using multiple methods something that is seldom seen in science today.
    2.It is readable by a layman.
    3. The sun may be going into a Minimum. ” The end of the Modern grand maximum of activity and the current low level of activity, characterized by the highest ever observed cosmic ray flux as recorded by ground-based neutron monitors, the very low level of the HMF and geomagnetic activity, should help to verify the connections between solar activity, cosmic ray fluxes, geomagnetic activity, the heliospheric magnetic field, and open field. Since some of these connections are somewhat controversial, these extreme conditions should help to quantify them better.”
    One can understand why a Stanford U. scientist would be very much opposed to people reading such a paper. Erhlich, Holdren and Obama wouldn’t like it.

    This paper gives an overview of the present status of our knowledge of long-term solar activity, covering the period of Holocene (the last 11 millennia). A description of the concept of solar activity and a discussion of observational methods and indices are presented in Section 2. The proxy method of solar-activity reconstruction is described in some detail in Section 3. Section 4 gives an overview of what is known about past solar activity. The long-term averaged flux of solar energetic particles is discussed in Section 5. Finally, conclusions are summarized in Section 6.
    Ilya G. Usoskin
    Sodankyl ̈ Geophysical Observatory (Oulu unit)
    University of Oulu, Finland

  2. emsnews says:

    Yes, my father, Dr. Aden Meinel, said before he died that we were going into a solar minimum. And publications refused to publish his findings on this!

    And yes, there is a lot of lying going on out there in academia. And solar experts are getting pretty fried about being sidelined by people who have no clue about how the sun works and its very tremendous importance when it comes to the climate.

    The sun is the #1 driver of our climate. All other systems conform to deal with what the sun does.

    • Brian G Valentine says:

      Yeah, that is 11 year periodicity, probably there are super and sub periods not yet discerned.

      I defy anyone to produce evidence of true “climate change” within recorded history. It cannot be done. “Climate Change” is strictly orbital, and that has a period of roughly 150,000 years.

      Always has. Always will.

      • Gail Combs says:

        There seems to be a lunar component as well as a solar component. The moon has a north/south vector to its tides and that may coincide with the Dansgaard–Oeschger events.

        The influence of the lunar nodal cycle on Arctic climate

        A listing of papers here: ansatte(DOT)

        Jo Nova on another new paper:

        • Brian G Valentine says:

          The only macroscopic and secular lunar variation is the tidal dissipation of the torque of the couple formed between the Moon and the Earth, resulting in some 5 cm per century increase of the distance between them.

          All other lunar variability is periodic.

          Libration of the Moon about its axis of rotation, providing a periodic glimpse of its dark side, is emulated in some people, and with less discernible periodicity

      • Gail Combs says:

        Of course all other lunar effects are periodic. D-O events are periodic ~1400 to 1500 years and that is around the same length as a saros series.
        ” It takes between 1226 and 1550 years for the members of a saros series to traverse the Earth’s surface from north to south (or vice-versa).”

        Actually the lunar effects are quasi periodic because the Moon -Earth are a double planet and not a moon circling a planet. (see E.M. link below)
        Physicist Clive Best gets into the math:

        More from Clive on lunar:

        (NOTE: NASA/NOAA says they haven’t the foggiest what causes D-O/bond events so this is a possible.)

        A bit of interesting stuff E.M. Smith dug up:

        I can not praise this paper enough for the clear way the authors follow the Scientific Method. Please read it, the whole thing.


        What it finds is that the actual history of recorded eclipses in India from 400 A.D. to 1800 A.D. does not match what a NASA model post-dicts for them. They then look at that difference and discover that the lunar “orbit” of the Earth must change more than predicted and that the tides on the Earth must be strong enough to change the Length Of Day. Think about that. LOD is dependent on the Moon and the particular orbital status. That is a LOT of mass to move around. Even at milliseconds, it is a big effect. Certainly more than it takes to move some air around on the surface and change some temperatures…..

        Now we see the value of long term preservation of original observations. Unadorned and unadulterated by “value added”. Simply put, it takes a very long baseline data set that has NOT been corrupted, adjusted, or changed in any way to do real Climate Science. In this case, 1200 years of carefully recorded data. If the “errors” in the data had been “adjusted” away, nothing would be learned. Had the models been held more accurate than 1000 year old observations, nothing would be learned…..

        So the NASA computer models flunk when it comes to predicting the lunar orbit….

    • Gail Combs says:

      That is pretty darn obvious. After all where does all the energy come from?

      I really hate the “New” position that the sun is constant and does not vary. It is complete bupkis. There are plenty of papers out there plus a lot of information from NASA that shows the sun is anything but constant even if TSI is relatively constant.

      I really like that paper because it puts a lot of the information in one spot and it is written so a layman can read it. I especially like the sections “3.7 Verification of reconstructions” and 3.7.1 Comparison with direct data

      • Brian G Valentine says:

        The solar irradiance is not constant but it might as well be. Variations of the standard 1367 W/M2 with at most 10 say are meaningless within natural changes in clouds, albedo, etc.

        Anything else is just plain short memory of history.

        • Gail Combs says:

          Brian it is not the TSI (Total Solar Irradiance) It is the proportion of short wavelengh to long wavelength I am talking about.

          … SIM suggests that ultraviolet irradiance fell far more than expected between 2004 and 2007 — by ten times as much as the total irradiance did — while irradiance in certain visible and infrared wavelengths surprisingly increased, even as solar activity wound down overall.

          The steep decrease in the ultraviolet, coupled with the increase in the visible and infrared, does even out to about the same total irradiance change as measured by the TIM during that period, according to the SIM measurements.

          The stratosphere absorbs most of the shorter wavelengths of ultraviolet light, but some of the longest ultraviolet rays (UV-A), as well as much of the visible and infrared portions of the spectrum, directly heat Earth’s lower atmosphere and can have a significant impact on the climate….

          UV Exposure Has Increased Over the Last 30 Years, but Stabilized Since the Mid-1990s

          NASA scientists analyzing 30 years of satellite data have found that the amount of ultraviolet (UV) radiation reaching Earth’s surface has increased markedly over the last three decades. Most of the increase has occurred in the mid-and-high latitudes, and there’s been little or no increase in tropical regions.

          The new analysis shows, for example, that at one line of latitude — 32.5 degrees — a line that runs through central Texas in the northern hemisphere and the country of Uruguay in the southern hemisphere, 305 nanometer UV levels have gone up by some 6 percent on average since 1979….

          UV and EUV are the wavelengths that penetrate the furthest into the ocean. GRAPH

          The wavelengths that creates and destroys ozone is in the UV. Trying to find information on ozone’s effect on climate is hard but there is THE BREWER-DOBSON CIRCULATION

          Then there is the Effect of Solar EUV on the Atmosphere:
          Solar EUV Flux is the primary source of energy and is a critical source of variability of the thermosphere and ionosphere.


          And that is not even getting into the Solar Wind.

        • Brian G Valentine says:

          (Brian makes a slight cough and asks NASA scientists if six percent of UV variability is consistent within the 10 percent natural ozone variability of any 10 000 sq km area of mid stratosphere)

  3. Brian G Valentine says:

    I only hope we don’t get an Obama-synthetique admin in 2016 like Hillary Clinton


    • Brian G Valentine says:

      Meaning that Republicans had better start thinking about what the 99% want, instead of worrying about the 1 per cent of occupiers, dead enders, free loaders, global warmers, welfare cheats, and the EU elite thinks the USA ought to have

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s