Oh, where, oh where have all the sunspots gone?
The fiery orange ball overhead has quieted during the past three years. Quiet in the sense that there have been very few sunspots – those black blotches on the sun’s surface caused by intense magnetic activity.
But just how quiet is quiet? Well, so far during the recent solar minimum (a period of low activity during the sun’s typical 11-year solar cycle), we’ve seen 183 sun-spotless days in 2007, 266 in 2008 and 259 in 2009 (as of Dec.16, 2009). Earth hasn’t witnessed a similar three-year stretch (1911, 192, 1913) of sun-spotless days since the early 1900s.
The blank sun has not gone unnoticed by the experts. "We're experiencing a very deep solar minimum," says solar physicist Dean Pesnell of the Goddard Space Flight Center.
"This is the quietest sun we've seen in almost a century," agrees sunspot expert David Hathaway of the Marshall Space Flight Center.
So why are sunspots under the spotlight? Because, according to solar scientists, their declining numbers, significant even by solar-minimum standards, could be the harbinger of colder temperatures ahead.
If so, it won’t be the first time the earth shivered as sunspots numbers declined. In the 17th century, the sun experienced a sunspot drought, dubbed the Maunder Minimum, which lasted 70 years – from 1645 until 1715. Astronomers at the time counted only a few dozen sunspots per year, thousands fewer than usual.
As sunspots vanished temperatures fell. The River Thames in London froze, sea ice was reported along the coasts of southeast England, and ice floes blocked many harbors. Agricultural production nose-dived as growing seasons grew shorter, leading to lower crop yields, food shortages and famine.
Canadian author and National Post environmental columnist Lawrence Solomon describes the period:
“Glaciers advanced rapidly in Greenland, Iceland, Scandinavia and North America, making vast tracts of land uninhabitable. The Arctic pack ice extended so far south that several reports describe Eskimos landing their kayaks in Scotland. Finland’s population fell by one-third, Iceland’s by half, the Viking colonies in Greenland [yes, it was once green, with forests and pastureland] were abandoned altogether, as were many Inuit communities. The cold in North America spread so far south that, in the winter of 1780, New York Harbor froze, enabling people to walk from Manhattan to Staten Island.”
Is mankind headed for another cool-down or big freeze? Based on recent scientific findings, it might be a possibility. A Danish research team led by Henrik Svensmark, director of the Center for Sun-Climate Research at the Danish National Space Center in Copenhagen, has discovered a strong correlation between sunspot activity, galactic cosmic rays and variations in the earth’s climate, a theory (supported by experiments) that challenges the prevailing concept of human-induced climate change, popularly known as anthropogenic global warming.
Henrik and his team have discovered that increased solar activity in the form of sunspots, flares and other disturbances generate solar winds that strengthen the magnetic fields surrounding earth, creating a bubble that suppresses cosmic ray penetration, inhibiting cloud formation and causing warming.
Conversely, when solar activity diminishes, the protective magnetic bubble weakens and more cosmic rays penetrate the earth’s atmosphere. The high-energy particles serve as host nuclei around which water vapor can condense and form droplets, resulting in more cloud cover and precipitation. Temperatures begin to fall as the clouds reflect more sunlight back into space.
“Galactic cosmic rays carry with them radiation from other parts of our galaxy,” says Ed Smith, NASA’s Ulysses project scientist at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif. “With the solar wind at an all-time low, there is an excellent chance the heliosphere [earth’s protective bubble] will diminish in size and strength. If that occurs, more galactic cosmic rays will make it into the inner part of our solar system.”
If Svensmark and other climate scientists are correct, the decline in solar activity may be responsible for the recent fall in global temperatures. In 1998, global temperatures at the earth’s surface began leveling off and have actually declined slightly since 2001, despite an increase in CO2 levels, calling into question the accuracy of climate models that predict catastrophic global warming.
The decade-long cool-down is clearly visible in satellite temperature measurements, which are widely viewed as more accurate than land-based temperatures readings, according to Dr. David Evans, who was a researcher with the Australian Greenhouse Office from 1995 to 2005. Such readings, he says, are often skewed by what is called the “urban heat island” effect, which articially elevates temperatures.
“NASA reports only land-based data, and reports a modest warming trend and recent cooling,” says Evans. “The other three global temperature records use a mix of satellite and land measurements, or satellite only, and they all show no warming since 2001 and a recent cooling.”
As Svensmark observes:
“In fact, global warming has stopped and a cooling is beginning. No climate model has predicted a cooling of the Earth – quite the contrary. And this means that the [global warming] projections of future climate are unreliable.”
If what Svensmark and other researchers say is true, it is very likely that when the heated debate between global warmers and global-warming skeptics finally ends, cooler heads may ultimately prevail.
Comments
Good article. Very well written. I understand the global warming issue a little better now. Thx.
I beleive the satellite data quoted is wrong. Because the satellite orbits are slowly declining in altitude, when the data is corrected for this. The temps actualy show a rise not a fall. Sorry to spoil the party.
Peter, I believe that the report you are quoting from was published in 1998. During the time from 1980 to 1998, I believe that most of us can agree that average global temperature, CO2 levels and average sun spot has been increasing. The point of contention is in the years starting at 2001 and ending now. CO2 levels has gone up, Sun spot activity has gone down and it seems that the average temperature of the Earth has slightly declined. If we are to understand what causes global warming (and cooling), then we need to understand to what degree CO2 and solar variation contribute to our environment.
Yes, it's an unusually deep minimum. And yes, it's one contributing factor to the apparent leveling off of temperatures. That Henrik Svensmark thinks he can predict what the sun is going to do next, and thus the increase in temperatures on this planet is over, is beyond belief.
However... Since we're in a trough of the 11-year solar cycle, I suspect that the relative calm is going to end soon. When it does, expect temperatures to rise again.
If you'd like to track solar activity on a daily basis, please visit www.spaceweather.com (not my site, just a darn good one.)
Peter, I believe that the report you are quoting from was published in 1998. During the time from 1980 to 1998, I believe that most of us can agree that average global temperature, CO2 levels and average sun spot has been increasing. The point of contention is in the years starting at 2001 and ending now. CO2 levels has gone up, Sun spot activity has gone down and it seems that the average temperature of the Earth has slightly declined. If we are to understand what causes global warming (and cooling), then we need to understand to what degree CO2 and solar variation contribute to our environment.
"If what Svensmark and other researchers say is true, it is very likely that when the heated debate between global warmers and global-warming skeptics finally ends, cooler heads may ultimately prevail."
But not before they've picked our pockets.
Why do people keep saying there has been recent cooling? 1998 is the warmest year on record, due a strong El Nino event on top of the warming trend but the first ten years of this century maintain the warming trend.
iceagenow.com
climatedepot.com
as mr. smith said, "human's nothing but a virus on earth"
our puny activities have really no bearing to earth, we
are barely a blip in it's timeline...roaches & ants will
live longer than us, having said that,
do we need to find cleaner nrg? live more "green",
hell yeah, but really, to say we humans are the sole cause
of global temperature and we can CONTROL earth's climate?
hahahahah, gods we are not, although some humans think they are..
Sorry Peter, you're wrong.
From Alan Watts at wattsupwiththat.com:
"According to the new data published by NASA, 1998 is no longer the hottest year ever. 1934 is.
Four of the top 10 years of US CONUS high temperature deviations are now from the 1930s: 1934, 1931, 1938 and 1939, while only 3 of the top 10 are from the last 10 years (1998, 2006, 1999). Several years (2000, 2002, 2003, 2004) fell well down the leaderboard, behind even 1900."
The theory of AGW will go down in history as the biggest scientific error of all time - right up there with the theory of the flat earth and the earth being the center of the universe.
"Peter says:
I beleive the satellite data quoted is wrong. Because the satellite orbits are slowly declining in altitude, when the data is corrected for this. The temps actualy show a rise not a fall. Sorry to spoil the party."
Oh dear.....
I'm climate-agnostic, just don't know enough one way or the other to believe in this new religion, but I've seen quotes from the IPCC saying that solar activity is fully included in their models.
And if not, they still have their equivalent of Orwell's "War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery" - that global warming may mean colder temperatures.
Kirk - Cast thine eyes on this:
wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/livingston-penn_sunspots2.pdf
Recently, continued measurements confirmed that the trend is still being followed, so the naughty extrapolation they did (only the IPCC can extrapolate a century - mere mortals and scientists can't extrapolate a decade - not allowed - nyyea) is still being followed. Note to self - buy an Aran sweater.
Kirk - Cast thine eyes on this:
(no URLs allowed, so google "Sunspots may vanish by 2015") for livingston-penn_sunspots2.pdf
Recently, continued measurements confirmed that the trend is still being followed, so the naughty extrapolation they did (only the IPCC can extrapolate a century - mere mortals and scientists can't even extrapolate a decade - not allowed - nyyea) is still being followed. Note to self - buy an Aran sweater.
This guy has written the best papers for layman on sunspots. It is very logically laid out.
David Archibald info
I like this paper
Solar Cycle 24: Implications for the United States
BUY GRAIN!
From ice core samples and limestone samples going back millions of years, it has been shown that we are actually living in a CO2 drought. This is obviously not good for plants, which need CO2 for photosynthesis, therefore it can be demonstrated that the low levels of CO2 are probably more responsible for deforestation than human activity. What *this* research shows, and quite clearly, is that solar activity has infinitely more of an effect on the planets climate than anything humanly possible - even our most powerful explosive devices are unable to penetrate the crust which is proportionately one tenth the thickness of an apple skin. We really are insignificant even on a planetary scale, never mind a universal one.
gore? whos that a scientist? oh yeah just a politician lobbying to make some rich folks even richer and at the same time fill his pockets with pawn money written all over his little sell out white asse
There is no doubt that sunspot activity has declined. As a radio amateur, I see the results of this clearly, particularly on the 40M band which used to be THE band for inter-Britain contacts and is now only suitable for long-skip contacts. The sun is the main climate driver for earth. Obvious really, since it is the only source of long-term energy.
The global warming business is not only a scam, sadly it has also become a religion, with folk believing in it and dismissing any scientific evidence to the contrary.
Suggested reading: Heaven & Earth, by Prof. Ian Plimer for those who have not yet caught religion.
"It might be a possibility." Things like that drive me out of my mind. Thr statement would bother me even if I didn't suspect the writer meant either "it's a possibility" or "it might happen".
At last some real science - and what irony that it is a Danish research team that is leading the way.
I,m not a scietist but Ive been interested in climate change etc. and the suns activity since I found out that the centre of gravity of the solar system was outside the sun back in the 70's Piers Corbyn predicted this all back in the 90's and I think robert[?] temple published a chart in a book that showed this period of extreme quiet on the sun using a number of criteria and if you can understand it[I can't] theres some interesting stuff linked on the causes of sunspots on richard hoaglands enterprise mission website. Still when the ice at the poles is melting that means we have global warming
Thanks Peter, a good point! I'm sure to inform all of the scientists of their miscalculated error right away.
Reading a focussed heat source detector closer to, will not reveal higher temperatures. Flying in a decaying orbit also increases temperatures through air friction.
Your statement is backwards.
ang baho mo
One does not have to be scientiest to recognize the effect of the sun on the temperature: ice ages, night-day temperature difference, ...; on the other hand: the beer-lambert law says that the heat adsortption by co2 depends logarithmically on the co2 content: that means with increasing absolute co2 content, the temperature will be increasingly negligible.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!