Joe Bastardi Challenges Jeff Master’s Claims About Sunspots

Guest post by Joe Bastardi


A rebuttal to  Weather Underground statement

“In the last 35 years of global warming, sun and climate have been going in opposite directions.”

First of all, Dr Jeff Masters, as a PHD in METEOROLOGY   and someone running a business, is someone  is  naturally have  respect for.  You don’t accomplish what he has without having to face  an overcome challenges.  So  I look at this differently than some of the ignorant  or  deceptive missives from others I have challenged before on this site,  many from the climatologists  that make statements that show me they don’t look at the weather.

Lets look at the last  400 years of sunspot cycle

Lets now look at the  PDO  since   1900

Suppose the reason for the  “little ice age” was indeed the lack of solar activity.  That means  we are starting from a very cold , below normal  global temp,  at the end of the  2 minimums,  so   if the sun were controlling all this, then we should be warming up in response,  which we have.

Now let me opine this. With sunspot activity backing away a bit the last 50 years,  its still, relative to what we saw to put us into the Little ice Age, well above the threshold of where it was to put us into the cold period. So it would stand to reason that we would still warm.

Now bring in the warm PDO over the last  35 year. You claim we are still warming. But you make the argument against co2 unwittingly  because you can easily see that the sun and then the warm cycle of the PDO, would easily explain this!!!

Now  let look at the last  15 years of the 35 year period. Even with a  warm pdo, and a  still ramped up  solar cycle  23, the global temp leveled off, and since the pdo flip has started  a jagged retreat!

The chart on the bottom left (above) is strength of correlation of the  ocean to temps and on the right the sun to temp.

This is line with climate cycle theory, that we have reached an equilibrium   in the earths temps  that the sun and the oceans have brought us to now and  the theory we Neanderthals  have  ( okay me, I am the Neanderthal  since I forecast every day and don’t have a phd and have been force to research all this, to make up  for my obvious limitations , the same ones that make me rely on ACTUAL  DATA  rather than virtual models) that the combination of the oceanic cycles  turning the other way, and the solar  cycles going into the tank mean cooling is starting.  MY FORECAST IS OUT THERE DR MASTERS, THAT AS MEASURED BY OBJECTIVE SATELLITE TEMPS,   SOMETHING WE DID NOT HAVE TILL THE END OF THE LAST COLD CYCLE OF THE PDO IN 1978,THE EARTHS TEMP BY 2030  WILL RETURN TO THE LEVELS THEY WERE IN THE LATE 1970S.  Pray tell, what is your forecast, and instead of trying to  explain what  happened l lets make the foreacst, since we have an objective way of looking at things, MAKE THE FORECAST  FOR THE COMING 20 YEARS.

Is the  warming to resume, or as I  say, and this is not even really bringing the sun in which in many circles is huge,  we will return to levels in 2030 we were  at in the late  1970s.  And the  wild card is volcanoes. This is part  of the triple crown of cooling I introduced  in 2008  that brought the usual   Bastardi Bashers out in force, which of course they will be after they read this.

In the meantime, while the global temp pauses and is well under projections of doom and gloom even as co2 runs off on its merry way, let me put this  question to Dr Masters

Just where is the funding going to come from so a future Dr Jeff Masters  can get the grants to study, perhaps start a business and by doing so, whether I think you are right or wrong,  affect people for the better around him. We are handcuffing our society with an agenda that to many looks to be totally off base, and at the very least pales compares to the problems we have today.  The site of people starving in our streets  while  the economy flounders, the tax base (  some of that goes to grants for our universities too) collapses  and misery mounts, is inexcusable in a  practical and ethical manner and far short of the intentions of people that founded this nation for what its supposed to be about.  You fight the devil you know,  not something that may be no more than a Utopian fantasy.  It is immoral and unethical to foster misery  now because of  what may be nothing tomorrow. So make your  forecast, for we have the means to test it. Mine has been out there for  4 years and the  data says its making a point, even if it happens to be hot in the US  ( less  than 10% of the globe) for a period.


About stevengoddard

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

46 Responses to Joe Bastardi Challenges Jeff Master’s Claims About Sunspots

  1. Edward. says:

    PDO trend line, says it all really, that’s how nature is, man can gas on all he likes. In the end, mother nature will do as she requires, the oceans dictate a big, big, big role in what the temperatures will be set at, it’s our terrestrial Air-Con.

    And……………………CO2? …………………………..It is a canard.

    Nice one Joe.

  2. Owen says:

    Joe Bastardi lives in the real world unlike most climate PhDs, so I’ll take his analysis of things over theirs 100% of the time.

    • In the middle of the much delayed increase to Solar/Sunspot Maximum, the Sun suddenly goes Quiet for 3 straight days and those at NASA/ use 3 different very hard to see areas of that was far from true SunSpots, on 3 totally different areas of the Sun each of those days to keep from saying the sun was Spotless or Blank! They then State today: “ Breaking the temporary monotony of A BLANK SUN, a new sunspot is growing rapidly in near the southeastern limb of the solar disk.” It will not show in the official numbers as Spotless Days this Year, but it was 3 straight days without True Sunspots!!!

  3. kirkmyers says:

    Manufactured in the 1980s, the AGW fraud is driven by politics, the pursuit of money and power, and the desire of global elitists and anti-capitalist eco-fanatics to destroy our industrial society, reducing us all to a life of bare subsistence in a command-and-control economy. It has absolutely nothing to do with “saving the environment.”

    The billions of dollars in research grants will dry up if the AGW theory collapses, so the hockey stick crowd in government and academia will resort to any subterfuge to keep their fraudulent theory (now on life support) alive. Many good scientists remain silent about the AGW lies out of fear of losing their jobs. The AGW religion tolerates no apostates.

    The damage the “climate change” cranks have done to science is irreparable.

    • NoMoreGore says:

      I fear that raw power is all that remains required to imprison humanity with this plot. They have abandoned most pretexts of noble causes. They make it very clear they intend to FORCE it upon us if they can. A few remaining rational Democrats in the Senate and the GOP held house are the only thing stopping them. They will return with their minions to finish the job as soon as they are able, by ANY MEANS necessary.

      So, this is now a war of information…. of awareness. All those who tune into the networks and have no clue they’re being indoctrinated must be educated, and even then, it will take a Herculean effort to truly turn this boat around.

    • Andy says:

      Can’t help but agree with the damage to science.
      Medical advances and technology advances are coming in leaps and bounds but with “climate cranks” poisoning the well, there seems to be beginning moves to reject new developments and ideas outright without consideration.

      Queensland’s (Australia) brand new conservative government just canned their Climate Change department set up by the previous Labor government.

      They need to save money and are cutting out waste.

      First pebble that might start an avalanche.

      Enjoy the site – congrats Steve on all the work you put in.

  4. A C Osborn says:

    I can’t actually see a graph of temp Vs SunSpot Count?
    Or it’s correlation.

  5. Sparks says:

    Joe, P Gosselin at has reported;

    “University Of Wisconsin Antarctica South Pole Station Sets New Record Low: -100.8°F…Media AWOL”

    The mercury dropped to -73.8°C/-100.8°F, breaking the previous minimum temperature record of -73.3°C/-99.9°F set in 1966.”

  6. tckev says:

    You tell ’em Joe.
    The shroud waving, doom-mongering PhDs that wish to transform science — into increasing specializations, with more unaccountable public money. Move the science focus away from the physical/material world and towards a computer modeled organization of society, while formulating the basis of policy. A policy of world population control.

  7. Andy DC says:

    The weather models have flipped and are now showing quite a heatwave during the upcoming week.

    As far as Joe’s forecast is concerned, how are we supposed to know how a forecast for 2030 will verify when it is still 18 years away? The forecast is meaningless at present time, because there is no way to prove or disprove its validity.

    • John says:

      What in the heck does a “heat wave” in the summer have to do with any of this? Heat waves, even record heat waves, do not prove AGW anymore than the current record cold in Antartica means an ice age has begun.

  8. johnmcguire says:

    Thanks Joe and thanks Steven for having him here. I just keep a very rough accounting of the temperature here in northwest Oregon and we are having a cool spell and have not really had any hot weather yet this year here. Portland with all it’s concrete and activity might be a different story but out here in the country it is a cool spring though not anything like last year which was destructive from a growers point of veiw. The crops look pretty good although we suffered some hail damage to the apples. I have been in agreement with your forecast Joe as the climate here correlates with your predictions or I should say your predictions correlate with the climate. These wizards and warlocks with their models can’t even guess right let alone predict any thing right.

  9. Don Gaddes says:

    The exact relationship of ‘Sunspots’ to ‘Dry’ Cycles on Earth (and their forecasting) is explained in Alex S. Gaddes’ book ‘Tomorrow’s Weather’ (1990)
    It is a shame Joe,that you appear to be ‘blinkered’ by your insistence in trying to link ENSO
    Fantasy with very real Solar/Earth climate relationships.
    ‘Sun and Climate’ are inextricably and ‘harmoniously’ linked. Be encouraged Joe, Masters knows less about it than you do.
    An updated version of the above work (with ‘Dry’ Cycle forecasts to 2055) is available as a free pdf from

  10. len holliday says:

    Joe Bastardi is on the money with this subject as he always is. This whole Global Warming Crap has been driven by Al Gore and politics that all started in the United States. And yes, Obama is right up in the middle of it. Every time I turn on the TV, someone else is telling the world how bad Global Warming is. I’m sick of it, and so are the American People! As Meteorologist, we need to get our minds that GOD gave us on something constructive. For example; How do we save lives when the next Hurricane hits the U.S. or how do we put out better forecast with a longer lead time on Tornado Outbreaks. After all, what is the job of a Meteorologist? Joe Bastardi is right about Global Warming! Why will no one listen to the man? People have gone crazy. I even tried to join a group on LinkIn the other day and I was turned down. Come to find out, they turned me down because the guy that owned the site saw a good comment about Joe Bastardi and his take on Global Warming. He would not let me join because he though JB did not know what he is talking about. How Stupid Can You Be? I’m beginning to believe that Joe Barstardi is the only Meteorologist in the world that has any sense. Thanks! Len R. Holliday

  11. Peter says:

    Joe, you keep showing the map off of Dr. Ryan Maue’s site where it says the yearly global temperature anomaly to date is -0.013 C. But thats from the 1980-2010 average. If you take the 1970-2000 normals, the global temperature anomaly would be ABOVE normal since the 1970s were cooler than the 1980s. Stop distorting the facts.

    • Anthony says:

      Isnt that why we run 30 year averages for that reason?

      Bleat all you like, tempos have slowly declinined and will accelerate towards the end of the decade.

      Joe has the balls to put out a forecast and no one else has, why is that you think?

    • NoMoreGore says:

      Are you for real? Or was this sarcasm? Why would he use a baseline that ended a decade ago? Just because it suits the AGW fantasy? He’s using the previous 30 years like all warmers said we were supposed to do…..when it suited their story. Now the window has moved, and the good ship CAGW is sinking.

    • Ron Greer says:

      why, are you scared of the satellite era?

    • Amber says:

      Peter check your facts,sattelite measurments did not start till the late 1970s,bye the way its 2012 and we have cooled.

  12. johnmcguire says:

    Hi Don Gaddes, I remember vaguely hearing something about sunspots and dry cycles a few years ago , but at the time did not take the time to check it out. Probably some what due to the fact that here in the pacific northwest we are blessed with a abundance of moisture and tend not to worry about dry. It sounds interesting and I will look at it. But although Joe no doubt has some rough edges to knock off his theory it looks to me as if he is gaining a solid understanding of the science of it and I have been following his forecasts now for a couple of years. Due to his statements and my own observations we have been planting earlier ripening varieties of apples and I think it is the right move. I’ll continue to listen to Joe as it seems he is always seeking new knowledge and isn’t trying to snow us to make money.

  13. gregole says:


    Your last chart, for me, tells all – CO2 going up over time, delta T petering out in comparison to the alarmists and doom-mongers forecasts, and not one word of defense from the warmista. Where is the global warming? We are still measuring in tenths of a degree so as far as I am concerned for all practical purposes Man-Made-Global Warming is nothing but a noisy signal around zero. Lets not even get into (although we could…) how much this tiny, miniscule delta T is caused by Man-Made CO2 and how much not.

    It’s 2012 people, how long have these kooks and crackpots been predicting doom? None of it has happened. But it hasn’t gotten through to the MSM – Popular Science is the latest, in their last edition, to give a long embrace and a big kiss to Man-Made-Global Warming. I’d love to discuss their artical but I can’t – I immediately trashed my copy. I will not renew my subscription. They go the route of Scientific American and Newsweek.

    Joe, keep up the fight – they are wrong and it is not over yet.

    • “Popular Science” is ‘family’ owned by the Bilderberg attendees the Bonnier of Sweden gang. They have actively promoted every elitist position. The reason the Sunspot Chart shows an UNNATURAL up-tick in the early 1950’s is that Max Waldmeir of the Swiss Federal Observatory took it upon himself to ADD an increase facto to account for Sunspot size. The same ‘actual’ count, supplemented with the “Max Fudge Factor”. This is all wall-to-wall LIES.

  14. WXBEE1 says:

    Jerome Namias had the right idea many years ago … weather is ruled by the oceans…

  15. Rick K says:

    Thanks so much, Joe! Your contributions are always welcome and educational. Keep up the good fight!

  16. Eric Webb says:


    There’s a very good reason why 1970-2000 normals are not used. The objective satellite era for measuring global temperatures, WITHOUT DISTORTION, OR COOLING PAST TEMPS, began in 1979. So, it makes perfect since to use the 1980-2010 average because it CAN NOT BE CHANGED by warmists, and is a much better representation of current temperatures, because it represents current data. Clearly, when people like Mann and Hansen distort and fudge data, especially before 1979, it would be wise to use data that can’t be changed or altered to fit one’s personal agenda.

  17. scizzorbill says:

    I give the marine weather forecast on a cruisers net in the SW Caribbean. I use Passage Weather, Intellicast for the satellite view, and the rain radar from the Panama Canal which covers a large area. I tried Weather Underground, but it just didn’t work for me. Now I know why. I also refuse to go to NOAA, as I don’t want weather based on compliance to the “Agenda”.

  18. Why does the graph at ‘Skeptical’ Science graph of the relationship between solar activity and temperature merges two entirely different data sets into the same line? (Very poor practice and should never be done.) It also shows TSI dropping since about 1998 however solar max was actually around 2003.

    • Andy says:

      Love the data charts. Unadjusted data always tells a very interesting story.

      Another on I like is the GISS temperature record of Cloncurry, Qld. We know someone has modified the Alica Springs data – but Cloncurry’s temp record over 100 years was flat last week and it’s in the centre of Queensland.

      If global temperature is rising it has to rise in all places.

  19. Mike says:

    I’m a huge fan of Weather Underground…but only because it provides a convenient place for uploading and viewing my personal weather station data on the internet. Every now and then when I’m in the mood for a good laugh, I’ll read Jeff Masters’ blog. When I want to gain insight into the factors controlling the weather (and dare I say climate) I read Joe Bastardi’s blog on Weatherbell Premium.

    • Lou says:

      I got banned from WU the other day for uploading a picture of Obama meme where it said “my work is done” after destroying USA.

      Oh well.

  20. Eric Webb says:

    Same here Mike!!! I also like going to Jeff Master’s blog to get a good laugh, those people on there have there heads so far in the sand, and there are warmists everywhere. If you even question the AGW scam on that site, you’re labeled as a racist, denialist, or whatever insulting term the GW nutcases like to use. When I want to get good information on climate I go to Joe Bastardi’s twitter page, Watts Up With That, and of course here at Real Science.

  21. Steve Wilde, and myself have been in pretty good agreement about the solar variability and how that in turns effects the climate through solar changes themselves. I take it further, by trying to show the secondary effects from those solar changes.
    Those secondary effects, again being as follows:



    . A sun that displays variability changes, seems to effect earth’s magnetic field by weakening/strenghtening it,in very fast ,sharp ways..





    I think what is not being appreciated or understood by the mainstream is the fact that solar variations are much more common and have a greater degree of magnitude/duration(change/staying power) then what the present thinking is. In addition the secondary effects from these solar changes are not being taken seriously enough and are much greater, then what mainstream present thinking is.

    If one just studies the two most recent solar minimums those being the DALTON ,and MAUNDER MINIMUMS, one can see the same changes took place with earth’s climate each time, both BEING associated with low solar activity.

    I say those two periods of low solar activity can be exceeded in magnitude and duration , and have been in earth’s past, creating a much greater change in the climate, then what even happened during the DALTON/MAUNDER MINIMUMS.

    I say the variabilty of the sun and how it effects items that control the climate are being greatly underestimated.The typical 11 year sunspot cycle is NONSENCE, and that is what mainstream is fixated on. When the sun does display an 11 year sunspot typical pattern of course nothing is going to happen, because the sun is changing in a regualr pattern ,which cancells itself out.

    Here we have mainstream trying to put upon the public that, that is the norm, which is flat out wrong. Mainstream in addition, is also trying to down play the EXTREME solar activity that has taken place prior to 2005, going back to 1850 , which I say is 100% responsible for the temperature rise last century.

    Here we are in 2012 , and the sun has had a significant change which started in year 2005. Lag times have to be appreciated ,but I say once this solar max.of cycle 24 passes on by(which is very very weak) that is when the impacts of the quiet sun on the climate will start to exert themselves.
    If the study of LIVINGSTON, and PENN ,should come to be, that could mean this GRAND MINIMUM can be much more severe then anticipated, and the climatic effects that much more.


    Past histroy shows the temperatures do not change gradually, they go in jerks both up and down. The only time temperatures change gradually is when the climate is in one particular climatic regime. I say led by the sun, and through the secondary effects, if duration of time,magnitude of change is strong enough, thresholds will be met which will then cause the climate to shift into another climate regime,jhence the sharp temperature changes, during those times.

    If it is not the sun ,I say what is it?????

  22. When the climate is in a particular climatic regime all the items that control the climate from the
    sun,to volcanoes,to enso,to the pdo are going to result in random temperature fluctuations even
    if the same forcings are involved.

    What is needed is for thresholds to be met by the various items that control the climate in order to
    change it in one direction or another. This is not easy to accomplish,but when it happens it can
    be very abrupt.
    The sun ‘s variation per say is not going to change the climate or even correspond to temperature
    changes over the short run ,due to the endless feedbacks in the system to begin with and due to
    what state the climate system is in at any given time.

    How the climate changes is when THE POSITIVE FEEDBACKS that are created, are so strong that
    they overtake the negative feedbacks. How that is accomplished is ONLY if the duration and degree
    of MAGNITUDE change, in the items that controll the climate (let’s say the sun) are PERSISTENT
    enough and INTENSE enough to create a POSITIVE feedback in the climate system that can
    overwhelm the mostly negative feedbacks(which keep things in check most of the time),to cause the
    climate to shift into another range of temperatures or regime change.

    In order for solar variation to accomplish that POSITIVE feedback, it does not mean it does it, just
    by the fact that it varies. It has to vary by X amount ,for X amount of time in order to create the
    POSITIVE feedback through it’s variance that is strong enough to overcome the other negative feed
    backs in the climate system in order to exert it’s effects on the climate system.
    Also lag times have to be considered, especially the ocean which can, put off solar effects in the
    short run.
    LEIF ,may understand solar ,but I think he is lacking in the climate aspect of things.
    To put this in another way, I should have said I havesaid I never seen the temperatures rise when
    the sun was in a prolong deep minimum period or fall when the sun was in a very prolong active

  23. Don Gaddes says:

    You are correct in labeling an ’11 Year’ Sunspot Cycle as ‘nonsense’ Salvatore. The true value is 11.028148 years. This precise number is vital in producing an exact forecast method for ‘Dry’ Cycles, as worked out by Alex S. Gaddes in his book ‘Tomorrow’s Weather’ (1990) An updated version of this work (with ‘Dry’ Cycle forecasts to 2055) is available as a free pdf from

  24. reminds me when they said the earth is flat, then they came out with numbers making the earth a sphere. Though the UN’s logo is flat earth.
    Who’s numbers are you going to believe?

  25. I obeserve the data, and it is strongly telling us the 11 year sunspot cycle up/down action, we have had more or less since the Dalton Minimum , came to a halt in 2005. Therefore any climate forecast based on the 11 year sunspot cycle of last century will likely be wrong.

    The change the sun underwent in Oct 2005, is very very SIGNIFICANT in my opinion. As a result of the change, UV light emitted from the sun is/will be much less, solar irradiance itslef will be at least .2 % less if not more, the solar wind is much weaker . All these items will have an impact on earth’s atmosphere and geomagnetic field.

    One example ,take the THERMOSPHERE. When the sun is quiet it cools and contracts.

    Another example , when the sun is quiet UV light concentrations change in the atmosphere ,that seem to be linked to jet stream pattern changes. A more -AO, which to my thinking is a very important factor in determining what kind of climate the N.H will experience going forward.

    Third example, when the solar wind is weak ,more cosmic rays enter earth’s atmosphere and there is strong evidence they help in promoting more low clouds, which in turn will have a net effect of cooling the earth.

    Then their is the link to volcanic activity versus prolong deep solar minimum periods. It seems to increase during or around these periods of solar activity.
    Just a few examples…

  26. Don Gaddes says:

    Again, Salvatore, As found by Alex S. Gaddes In his work ‘Tomorrow’s Weather’ (1990) an 11 year value for the ‘Sunspot Cycle’ will not produce a valid forecast. The true value is 11.028148 years.
    Yes, it has to be that precise. As to what causes the changes to Jet Stream cloud, Alex S. Gaddes suspected the appearance and disappearance of Neutrinos. (unpublished paper,circa 1983) If this phenomena can be correlated with the onset and duration of the discovered ‘Dry’ Cycles, it may explain the role of the Sun more fully, and solve the mystery of what Alex S. Gaddes termed the ‘W’ or ‘Weather Factor’ emanating from the Sun. This work is yet to be done.

  27. That is such a wrong approach, the REALITY IS there are countless positive feedbacks and negative feedbacks built into the climate system, constantly changing and changing within themselves in degrees of magnitude strength and duration of time that may or may not cause thresholds to be reached that may or may not change the climate. Also dependent upon the state the climate is in to begin with.

    His approach is ridiculous and will turn out not to be correct, just like the man made CO2 theory. I would not give it two cents worth of my time.If he is so percise he should be able to explain every past temperature event that has taken place on earth throughout it’s history. I am waiting for the earth shattering news of his findings and explanations. lol

    What I have been saying is since 2005 the solar activity has undergone a SIGNIFICANT change, and it is so significant that the solar change itself ,plus the secondary effects associated with the solar change(AO circulation,volcanic activity,cosmic rays, pdo/amo,geomagnetic field,enso etc) have now created a potential cooling setup ,that might bring the climate to certain thresholds going forward, that might be strong enough to put the temperatures into a lower range then what we have presently. Perhaps a DALTON MINIMUM, range.

    In closing my last comment on his approach is there is no 11 year ,there is no 11.028148 sunspot cycle that has anything to do with the climate per say. ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.

    If it were that simple we would have all the answers, instead of hardly having any answers to the climate puzzle.

  28. Don Gaddes says:

    If you want to read the work Salvatore, I await your request for the free pdf of the updated version of ‘Tomorrow’s Weather’ Alex S. Gaddes (1990) (with ‘Dry’ Cycle forecasts to 2055) available from
    If you want to reject the work without reading it, I can offer no further assistance. I assure you I am not stupid enough to promote a forecasting ‘mechanism’ that I have not observed in operation and documented over a considerable period of time.

    • jim verwey says:

      I’ll go with Joe any day over Jeff Master’s, who seems to have no understanding of solar physics, pdo cycles, cosmic rays, etc. So he has a PHd. Many ignorant people have PHd’s.

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 )

Connecting to %s