Ultraviolet Light Shone On Cold Winter Conundrum

[bluewave]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15199065

From the Article:

The Little Ice Age explained? As the Sun became more active (top, parameter given is open magnetic flux), the frequency of warm winters in England (bottom, from Central England Temperature Record) increased

[BethesdaWX]

http://www.bbc.co.uk...onment-15199065

From the Article:

The Little Ice Age explained? As the Sun became more active (top, parameter given is open magnetic flux), the frequency of warm winters in England (bottom, from Central England Temperature Record) increased

That is quite interesting, though maybe a mis-attribution of the actual solar forcing that was responsible? If it involved the -NAO I assume the Geomagnetic flux would be a causative factor there in the cold Europe? The Second Graph there follows the AA-index very well, and it is the AA-index that would measure the aspect of the sun that has the largest potential impact on the climate

This statement got me going though: "The researchers emphasise there is no impact on global warming." "It's a jigsaw puzzle, and when you average it up over the globe, there is no effect on global temperatures," Well hey if you're using the AO/NAO as reason for a change in climate state, locally or globally, you can't say global temperature won't be affected because as has been measured, a noteworthy change that tends to occur is the increase in tropical cloud cover during a -NAO. Even bringing up the global warming troubles me because they themselves state is is irrelavent. The blabbing out of scientific inaccuracies to the public just makes no sense to me.

This paper is very interesting (if you can read German ) http://www.eike-klim...SO_Borchert.pdf

As for winter in Europe, and the global temp, what I like to keep in mind is the equilibrium thing, regardless of a slight trend in the solar activity after 1980 the question becomes a topic of equilibrium, and if the response would be that of a rapid equilibrium or prolonged equilibrium, and it seems for the climate system as a whole the response to a forcing (peak to trough) in the differential of energy balance is a prolonged restoration process complicated by feedbacks, so in that case the Active Sun through the Mid 2000's would still have the effect of energy gain in global OHC.

So it doesn't surprise me at all (Especially AFTER correlting for the PDO/AMO fluxes) that there is a correlation to temperature.

Obviously it is one of many things that affect temperature, but there is definitely something there. I'm a big solar guy so I'm somewhat biased there but if I'm correct on anything the changes we'll see beginning sometime in the midde of this decade will catch many by surprise.

[NaoPos]

I thought Tambora was the culprit?

[BethesdaWX]

I thought Tambora was the culprit?

Not the entire LIA, no, I believe the Tambora Eruption was in the 1800's, the LIA was in it's deepest stages in the mid-late 1600's to about 1700 before we started pulling put of it, we warmed quite a bit from 1700 to 1775 via non-tree ring proxy data, volcanism usually leads to <5yr periods of temperature fluctuations via SO2 preventing SW radiation from entering the system.

The Maunder Minimum was preceded by the Sporer minimum, actually they were almost simultanious so the cooling out of the MWP (coindiciding with the Medieval Maximum) actually continued from the Sporer minimum into the Maunder Minimum, and yet another period of weak solar activity followed in the Dalton Minimum in the 1800's. The solar activity we saw in the 20th century was some of the highest ever in the Holocene Interglacial also referenced as the Modern Maximum, which is thought to have reached higher levels than the Medieval Maximum, which is also thought to have been a very high maximum as Sea levels and global temperatures were comparable to those of today.

There are various reconstructions on temperature before the 1850 cut-off we have in surface data records, but I tend to put more faith into those that feature larger variations, and never use tree-ring proxies, simply as a result of resolution pick-up often turning out vague, relative to actual temperature change over shorter timespans, as well as what "noise" tends to affect different proxy datasets, such as rainfall, CO2 levels, temperature, chemical contamination, etc.

Dr. Loehle, et al 2007 is one of the datasets I feel catches the true variation over time, regardless of the bickering between scientists on all sides with various opinions, different motives, etc, to attack eachother's work.

[SN_Lover]

"Its intensity has increased since the 1600s when the period known as the Maunder Minimum began, with astronomers documenting a dearth of sunspots over many decades." Yes this is true, but lets look at it from another perspective.

The figure above demonstrates the number of sunspots per given time and the number of spotless days. Note the downward trend after solar cycle 21. We are entering a relatively quiet solar period now according to this Article.

Overall I agree with this article.