Settled Science Update

In 2007, Mike Lockwood said that he had conclusive evidence  that man-made CO2 was responsible for global warming.

Sun Not a Global Warming Culprit, Study Says

National Geographic News July 12, 2007

Cyclical changes in the sun’s energy output are not responsible for Earth’s recent global warming, a new study asserts.

Instead the findings put the blame for climate change squarely on human-created carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gases—reinforcing the beliefs of most climate scientists. “Up until 1985 you could argue that the sun was [trending] in a direction that could have contributed to Earth’s rising temperatures,” said study author A. Mike Lockwood of the University of Southampton in Britain. Two decades ago, “it did a U-turn. If the sun had been warming the Earth, that should have come to an end, and we should have seen temperatures start to go the other way,” Lockwood said. Yet Earth’s temperatures have continued to climb since that date—making a strong solar role in warming appear unlikely.

I think it’s quite conclusive,” said Lockwood, who co-authored the report appearing in the current issue of the U.K. journal Proceedings of the Royal Society A.

Sun Not a Global Warming Culprit, Study Says

Now, he says the exact opposite

Real risk of a Maunder minimum ‘Little Ice Age’ says leading scientist

According to Professor Lockwood the late 20th century was a period when the sun was unusually active and a so called ‘grand maximum’ occurred around 1985.

Since then the sun has been getting quieter. By looking back at certain isotopes in ice cores, he has been able to determine how active the sun has been over thousands of years. Following analysis of the data, Professor Lockwood believes solar activity is now falling more rapidly than at any time in the last 10,000 years. He found 24 different occasions in the last 10,000 years when the sun was in exactly the same state as it is now – and the present decline is faster than any of those 24. Based on his findings he’s raised the risk of a new Maunder minimum from less than 10% just a few years ago to 25-30%. And a repeat of the Dalton solar minimum which occurred in the early 1800s, which also had its fair share of cold winters and poor summers, is, according to him, ‘more likely than not’ to happen.

He believes that we are already beginning to see a change in our climate – witness the colder winters and poor summers of recent years – and that over the next few decades there could be a slide to a new Maunder minimum.


Just as scientists are starting to come to their senses, the LA Times bans any letters which don’t emphasize discredited science.

About stevengoddard

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

26 Responses to Settled Science Update

    • F. Guimaraes says:

      Thanks Paul, we still must confirm what is going to happen with the Sun’s polar fields in the coming months to understand better the meaning of the present minimum, IMO.
      There is great probability that the Sun will present us with new science during this cycle and the next (and possibly much more).
      Leif Svalgaard is confident that we’re heading to a new Maunder, due to the increasing observational verification of the Livingston-Penn effect and others, like Geoff Sharp, are expecting a non-reversal of the Sun’s polar fields in this cycle.
      I believe both phenomena could happen.
      The bottom line, in my view, is that we actually don’t know what a Maunder minimum is in terms of solar radiations, we know that the sunspots disappeared but we have no clue of the cause.
      It’ll be a present of Mother Nature (at least in terms of new scientific knowledge) if a new Maunder really materializes in the present solar grand minimum.

  1. The Iconoclast says:

    Underlying the AGW agenda is an anti-human and anti-freedom agenda. They don’t want us using so much energy, having so much fun, worrying too little or enjoying too much freedom. A government takeover of the rest of the economy is just what’s needed. Who cares if AGW is real or not, the LA Times has decided, like so much of the MSM, that what’s best is for us to be stripped of our wealth, have our toys taken away and, if possible, frozen to death. There are too many of us anyway and we are too stupid to understand what is best for us.

  2. Olaf Koenders says:

    At least Lockwood changed his tune, but that makes it painfully obvious he’s an ambulance-chasing whore, leaping from one assumed calamity to the next.

    • gator69 says:

      He still thinks/claims that CO2 will overpower the solar influence in the end. He is simply hedging his bet on his legacy while cashing future grant checks.

      • Ernest Bush says:

        Why is it with climate screamers that one only needs to follow the money to understand all their motives. The combination of climate religion and money produces the monstrous results of misery and poverty wherever these people are allowed to live. Oh, right! Sounds like socialism. Now all is understood.

  3. Cheshirered says:

    Maybe this could inspire a juicy info-pic that shows who said what and when compared to events now?

    Eg Arctic Death Spiral 2007 ———— Arctic at ‘normal’ levels 2013.

  4. F. Guimaraes says:

    It’s a good thing that Mike Lockwood has changed his mind, others should do the same.
    It’s a hallmark of true science to review an hypothesis or abandon it if the observed facts are overwhelmingly proving it wrong.

    • The Iconoclast says:

      Agreed. We welcome scientists changing their opinion! It’s healthy for their work and it’s healthy for science. It should be accompanied by some kind of straight up explanation: This is what I thought before and why I thought it. This is what I learned and what I think it means. This is where I am now.

      If however the switch is from warming to cooling yet the government must still implement communi-facism, then get the pitchforks.

    • “The undefeated Pratiots are going to win the Soup Bowl!”

      “If the Prats lose by less than 7 points, I’m counting that as a win.”

      That ain’t exactly what changing your mind is, ya know.

      • The Iconoclast says:

        With every walk-back the edifice becomes more rickety. With every patch, rococo. Eventually, it will collapse. Perhaps very soon.

  5. Sundance says:

    Obama has earned this new presidential theme song.

    Benghazi incompetence => It wasn’t me
    IRS scandal => It wasn’t me
    NSA spying => It wasn’t me
    Obamacare disaster => It wasn’t me

  6. Robertv says:

    Settled Science The Electric Sun

  7. Pathway says:

    So, it wasn’t the sun before it was the sun.

  8. slimething says:

    I remember well when L&F was proudly announced to the press phrases such as [final nail in coffin for the sun] being bandied about.

    Examples of Lockwood’s hubris and the mindless zombies and fellow fraudsters supporting the L&F junk science:

    I also remember Leif Svalgaard (another legend in his own mind) defending him.

  9. I’ve been following Lockwood’s public statements for many years now. I don’t think he is so much of a Warmist as a media slut.

  10. Phil Jones says:

    Excellent find…. Would never, never find this on the Huff Po or some other Regressive Progressive web site…

  11. orson2 says:

    Mike Lockwood is simply catching up with the findings solar physicists with the American Astronomical Society two years ago.

  12. Lockwood disputes journalist Hudson’s interpretation of his results: “It’s amazing how one can be misrepresented no matter how clear one tries to make it! One point I made to Hudson is that many of the so called bits of “evidence” for solar influence on global temperature actually come from Europe in winter (cf Eddy and all that) and so are not global at all. Depressing….so there is absolutely no misunderstanding here – I too am ‘vociferous advocate’ of (the known science that anthropogenic greenhouse gases causes) global warming!”

  13. Storm Talker says:

    One physicist called the phenomenon “Solar Science Bipolar Disorder”, what maybe refers best to. There is an inbalance between electron and protons as in 2014 also 80% of solar CMEs were positively charged or even SEPs. ( normally , resp. before 80 % CMEs rather negative- neutral) That leads also to and inbalance on Earth climate. However, if some experts in the US or UK experience cold weather , they should also look over their plate`s edge and refer to the heatwaves in Argentina, Brazil as well as in Australia going on at the same time. We here in South Germany- just some South of UK.- had no winter yet in 2014 and not one day with subzero temperatures, what ius more than unusual : Here no “ice age” is expected anymore for 2014 That saves costs

  14. Storm Talker says:

    PS I have only made this raw version ,without images after the event ( most satellites had a blackout during the main event) . I try to post: the embed code. Maybe it works . Its about what was was an X 1.2 flare on January 07 2014/ 18: 32. 42 , the special thing was<: it was associated to a major SEP , that accelerated Protons above the half speed of light with a density of 1.000 pfu. ( one of the strongest earth directed SEPs in the last years ?). Differently to X flares, or other types surface eruptions, negative pol CMEs SEPs have ideed strong geophysical effects ( I am documenting threm since 2013), resp I compared all SEPs in 2014 buts also (certain events " (serial SEPs ) in 2014 in 2011) and I just would say it in the word of NASA, what only and best can describe their potential " They can do everything"
    here the rleated NASA article (2005)
    embed code:

    video link:

    thanks and have a good time!

    • Storm Talker says:

      I have to add: yesterday morning I just sent and email to Prof. Mike Lockwood. .I had are some burning questions , such about sun spots the Sun`s behaviour and espiecially about the many SEPs those occure since 2013. And – i really received a personal answer by himself in the evening, in which he generally confirmed that “SEPs are a good point ” , regarding solar activities , those indeed have any considerable geophysical effects on the geophysics of the Earth. ( and NASA once wrote about SEPs. ” They can do everything” what descriobes it best I guess i had some good arguments and also some theories that may have interested him. Thus i believe SEPS thos occure mainly in the 11 year the solar max are simply ( any possibly elder) sunspots, those grow too big or sink too deep into the gas hull until they are torn apart be strong magnetic forces into their sunparticles. As I still believe (and as was also the common theory in earlier times- sunspost were believed to consist out of heavy dense matter. I suggest , only out of protons, those are so dense that they cannot not even absorb heat , with some neutrons , when just lock up some cinetic particles as electrons inside) , Sun spots must not come to existence or be be produced within the sun and could also be pieces of dark matter such es form exploded neutron stars the sun atrrackts when they drive by on their way across the universe . Mr Lockwood sent ma also a link to his work and thatb seems to be so sophisticated that I just feel as the amateur I am.

      • Storm Talker says:

        (2)One must know, that NASA had launched prior to the solar max in 2012/ 13 the greatest solar observatory program in menkinds history, This program involves all available provious satellites from ulisses to …,and a dense network of geophysical institutes observes the geomagnetic field Nasa lounched 3new satellites until 2010 two more launched afterwards to examine the deeper solar corona by sound waves it priodeces a.s.o. afterwards, The single scienmtic task were distributed all over the world. The italians in Catania count the sun spots ( i hope they count correctly) , the Russian observe the neutrons, the australian the solar radio brust and type II and IV radio sweeps, the Belgiums watch overthe CMEs.,( I just don`t know what the Germans do) All this data go to the US and likely also to their brother in law- UK., those are the directors of the program where the most scientifc work and analysis is done…Fortunataly NASA scientists are no ” global warmists” but do an mainly excellent scietific work

        and this all was done in a time when people all discussed the mayan calender and the predicted end of the world , Nasa isn`t free of those surrender it seems allthough nowhere in these scripts from the hopi or maya talsk about a surrender of the earth / they mean the human- our world ) not the Earth) But indeed all these prophecies ( inc the revelation) say directly and clerarly y ever again , that sun , would do that. revelation tells ” angels” ( often with “angels” stars are meant, thos have been named after old heroes of the first- third age ) would throw something into the sun that will create heat on Earth . Indios i meet each year told me , they understand their scripts that” the sun would produce bad and damaging energies” those will cause cataclysmic catastrophies on earth
        some citations>:
        (gospels) “The sun and moon will loose their shinig and the stars will fall ( from their places) in the sky, that will be the time/ sign when the “inborn son” of men will return!
        thats only tempeorary i hope, But who was Jeuse really then if not an alien ? a genetic hybrid alien X human.
        (revelation) the ( bad star) willö sweep a seventh of the stars form the sky ( a black hole)
        I am sure there was any visit in the past how otherwise would we know about that?
        and now, after all this effort it turned out that the sun was not ( as expected) more active than in th 23 cycle, but it was less. I dont believ that even such a giant program will answer the most burning questions . But just lets listen to these people what they can tell us anyway .
        thanks for reading all that its enough for the moment Cheers have a good time!

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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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