Page 63 of 117 < 1 2 ... 61 62 63 64 65 ... 116 117 >
Topic Options
#1084193 - 02/03/2012 16:09 Re: Temperature trends [Re: bd bucketingdown]
CeeBee Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 25/02/2012
Posts: 2644

I checked out those links you gave me. It explains a lot...

bd - As I understand it CO2 causes warming AND rising temperature causes CO2 rise...


Further reading

#1084247 - 02/03/2012 17:20 Re: Temperature trends [Re: CeeBee]
bd bucketingdown Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 07/02/2008
Posts: 6033
Loc: Eastern A/Hills SA
yes Co2 causes about 1C warming by 2100
BUT, solar runs the most of the rest through oceans and atmosphere
by changing heating, jetstreams, ozone amounts, ionosphere,magnetic, surface pressures, westerly wind belt position, etc. There are plenty of links out there if you really look deeply CB. And many more to discover. I have beeen studying the links for many years now.

Edited by bd bucketingdown (02/03/2012 17:21)

#1084276 - 02/03/2012 18:12 Re: Temperature trends [Re: bd bucketingdown]
crikey Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 01/02/2011
Posts: 2949
Loc: Tweed Heads
Interesting reading and links 'guys'
I learnt the equation for earths energy budget from CB's post and that if no feedback mechanisms exist ( if amplification is 1)the globe will increase about 1.2 deg in a century
I learnt from ROM's post that mid and upper layers are trending dryer or reduced moisture
but lower atmosphere is trending to higher moisture and precipitation /latent heat transfer at the convective layer) may have a negative feedback factor and may result in increased precipitation

and BD, l learnt the energy budget equation has the suns radiation factor as a constant at 1370m/m2
and from Roms post l really was intrigued by this data .

MEAN monthly temp data for the globe

Why is June and July the hottest temps and Jan/ Feb the coldest temps for the globe.?
11 deg c variation on land over 6 months.
There is quite a few degrees variation over 6 monthly intervals?

#1084283 - 02/03/2012 18:20 Re: Temperature trends [Re: crikey]
Locke Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 27/12/2007
Posts: 4532
Loc: Brisbane
Do we have the UAH value for Fenruary yet?
This post and any other post by Locke is NOT an official forecast & should not be used as such. It's just my opinion & may or may not be backed by sound meteorological data. For official information, refer to Australian Bureau of Meteorology products.

#1084298 - 02/03/2012 18:37 Re: Temperature trends [Re: Locke]
bd bucketingdown Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 07/02/2008
Posts: 6033
Loc: Eastern A/Hills SA
Wrong Crikey, the various solar outputs vary be very large amounts during solar cycles, that is fact!!! ie various ultra violet, magnetic, proton, electron, sector boundaries,
10.7cm, Ap, Kp, solar winde, photons, etc, etc, etc, solar output variables. If it is all so constant why do we have auroras, magnetic changes, radiation storms, solar wind large changes, ultra violet changes, radio wave changes, protection for astronauts in solar flares, outflow of solar energy from flaqres and corona holes, tropospheric solar induced temp changes, earths magnetic field punched open by holes from solar surges at times, ozone destroying solar storms hitting the earth, changing jet streams, changing seasons weather dramtically, etc, etc,etc, If you want to study it crickey and cb there is much much much to learn of solar changes and their effects and still much much more to learn. Cheers

Edited by bd bucketingdown (02/03/2012 18:46)

#1084304 - 02/03/2012 18:44 Re: Temperature trends [Re: bd bucketingdown]
crikey Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 01/02/2011
Posts: 2949
Loc: Tweed Heads
BD any links to the change in watts per m2 input into earths energy budget,for any of these solar variables . would be interested to have a look at your claims

#1084311 - 02/03/2012 18:51 Re: Temperature trends [Re: CeeBee]
ROM Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 29/01/2007
Posts: 6628
Glad those references were of help CB.

That is a 1990 paper CB and quite a lot has changed since then although some things have hardly changed at all. That is the harder part of the equation to figure out.
And that's with some hundreds of millions of tax payer dollars going nearly entirely to climate warming scientists while skeptical scientists were lucky to get the floor sweepings so as to speak.
The reasons for the unbelievable reaction against any scientists or even an ordinary interested person who may question the global warming / climate change meme are simple.
They are a huge threat to both the dogma believing warmers as they question the almost religious type ideological beliefs of the warmers and particularly to a section of the scientific ideologists, they are a real threat as the politicals might just come around to believeing the skeptical scientists and the great climate change gravy train funds would be cut off.

If you say as a lot of luke warmers and skeptical scientists are saying, there is NO problem then the politicians and the science funding bodies will just shrug their shoulders and say well it looks like we don't have to bother about that because they say there is no problem so we don't need to fund anything.

If, on the other hand you say, look our research is showing that we may be heading into a major climate catastrophe that has the possibility of destroying civilisation but we need much more in the way of research and funding to see whether this is the case and how serious it might be then of course, the politicians reaction is we can't possibly let this pass without making sure otherwise the electors will kill us if we don't check this so here's the money.

Human reaction, particularly if your ethics is a bit on the lean side. is to beat up to the maximum, the possible catastrophic aspect of what we know is a continuously changing global climate and that keeps the money flowing and provides a nice, extremely well paid academic position where you don't even have to leave the office to do your "research" on the internet and the big main frame computer.
Hence we have this ongoing CAGW meme that is chewing up literally billions of tax payer's dollars across western countries for absolutely no visible or detectable effect on the global climate and the way it changes.

And this after some 20 or 25 years of research on this "Catastrophic global warming", now "climate change" due to the global temperatures stopping rising some 12 to 15 years ago so the term global warming began to become untenable.

You might understand a little more the forces of greed and the discarding of any ethical restraints and the jumping on the global warming gravy train by many so called "scientists" when you look at the immense sums of American tax payer dollars that underpin a great deal of the so called global warming / climate change research that supposedly upholds the global warming / climate change meme.

Take a look at the "Follow the money" post on WUWT, some US$2.48 billion [ $2,481,000,000 ] spent on global warming / climate change and that is only for the USA's 2011 budget.

With that sort of money up for grabs by anybody and everybody who toes the party line on global warming / climate change, it takes an individual scientist with a very strong ethical and moral outlook to resist the temptation to climb aboard the gravy train particularly when those same skeptical scientists and other skeptical researchers are also subject to continuing demeaning insults and slander and name calling by so many of the cult type followers of the global warming dogma.

For those reasons you will probably get a much more honest opinion and honest research from the skeptical scientists than you will from the majority of those so called scientists that support the CAGW meme.
There are still honest scientists who genuinely believe that global warming is a future disaster for the human race but deep down most are just along on the global warming / climate change gravy train for the easy ride and the money.

JoNova also had an analysis of the climate change gravy train not so long ago as well with similar figures.

On increasing warming leading to increasing CO2! Well thats quite possible and some skeptical scientists such as Roy Spencer, very likely.
As sea water heats up it holds less CO2 so as the Sea Surface Temps have ben slowly climbing over the last half century it is highly likely that a lot of what is assumed to be anthropogenic origin CO2 is in fact outgassing of CO2 from the oceans.
Mankind origin CO2 is only actually measured in a few power stations and some other industrial processes but nearly all the anthropogenic CO2 amounts that you see constantly being regurgitated from all sorts of very doubtful sources is actually the outcomes of modeling of the CO2 sources.
It is so bad that something like half of the [ supposedly modeled and estimated ] anthropogenic releases of CO2 apparently disappear into CO2 sinks somewhere which they have not yet identified.
Otherwise if this supposedly Anthropogenic CO2 was still kicking around in the atmosphere, the rate of rise in atmospheric CO2 would be higher according to the modeled [ ? ] emissions from mankind's activities.

Roy Spencer points out that the two different isotopes of the carbon in the CO2 molecule , C12 and C13 of which C13 is about 2% less in the measured carbon isotopes and which is supposedly the identification factor in CO2 from the burning of fossil fuels and therefore is anthropogenic, run in almost exact parallel in their rise in PPMs in the atmosphere. If mankind was adding extra CO2 through the emissions from fossil fuels and his other activities the ratios of C13 to C12 would be changing but they are not. they are still holding the same ratios to one another even as the total CO2 levels rise.
And that really makes the claims of Anthropogenic emissions from fossil fuel burning as the prime culprit in any global warming very, very suspect and very doubtful indeed.
In other words there may well be a very different explanation for the increase in atmospheric CO2 other than from human sources.

Roy Spencer ; Head of NASA's satellite global temperature division;

Could the Ocean, Rather Than Mankind, Be the Reason?
More CO2 Peculiarities – The C13/C12 Isotope Ratio

Edited by ROM (02/03/2012 19:00)

#1084317 - 02/03/2012 18:57 Re: Temperature trends [Re: crikey]
bd bucketingdown Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 07/02/2008
Posts: 6033
Loc: Eastern A/Hills SA
These will give you an idea of the solar energy and forces involved in day to day, season to season and year to year and solar large cycle to solar small cycle periods.......

"October 23, 2003:Â Newly uncovered scientific data of recorded history's most massive space storm is helping a NASA scientist investigate its intensity and the probability that what occurred on Earth and in the heavens almost a century-and-a-half ago could happen again.

Right: An ultraviolet-wavelength picture of the sun taken by the ESA/NASA Solar and Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO) on Oct. 23, 2003.

In scientific circles where solar flares, magnetic storms and other unique solar events are discussed, the occurrences of September 1-2, 1859, are the star stuff of legend. Even 144 years ago, many of Earth's inhabitants realized something momentous had just occurred. Within hours, telegraph wires in both the United States and Europe spontaneously shorted out, causing numerous fires, while the Northern Lights, solar-induced phenomena more closely associated with regions near Earth's North Pole, were documented as far south as Rome, Havana and Hawaii, with similar effects at the South Pole.

What happened in 1859 was a combination of several events that occurred on the Sun at the same time. If they took place separately they would be somewhat notable events. But together they caused the most potent disruption of Earth's ionosphere in recorded history. "What they generated was the perfect space storm," says Bruce Tsurutani, a plasma physicist at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory.

Sign up for EXPRESS SCIENCE NEWS delivery

To begin to understand the perfect space storm you must first begin to understand the gargantuan numbers with which plasma physicists like Tsurutani work every day. At over 1.4 million kilometers (869,919 miles) wide, the Sun contains 99.86 percent of the mass of the entire solar system: well over a million Earths could fit inside its bulk. The total energy radiated by the Sun averages 383 billion trillion kilowatts, the equivalent of the energy generated by 100 billion tons of TNT exploding each and every second.
But the energy released by the Sun is not always constant. Close inspection of the Sun's surface reveals a turbulent tangle of magnetic fields and boiling arc-shaped clouds of hot plasma dappled by dark, roving sunspots.

Once in a while--exactly when scientists still cannot predict--an event occurs on the surface of the Sun that releases a tremendous amount of energy in the form of a solar flare or a coronal mass ejection, an explosive burst of very hot, electrified gases with a mass that can surpass that of Mount Everest.

Below: These Northern Lights appeared over Wisconsin on Oct. 22, 2003. During the superstorm of 1859, such lights appeared as far south as Cuba and Hawaii. Photo copyright Chris VenHaus.

What transpired during the dog days of summer 1859, across the 150 million-kilometer (about 93 million-mile) chasm of interplanetary space that separates the Sun and Earth, was this: on August 28, solar observers noted the development of numerous sunspots on the Sun's surface. Sunspots are localized regions of extremely intense magnetic fields. These magnetic fields intertwine, and the resulting magnetic energy can generate a sudden, violent release of energy called a solar flare. From August 28 to September 2 several solar flares were observed. Then, on September 1, the Sun released a mammoth solar flare. For almost an entire minute the amount of sunlight the Sun produced at the region of the flare actually doubled.

"With the flare came this explosive release of a massive cloud of magnetically charged plasma called a coronal mass ejection," said Tsurutani. "Not all coronal mass ejections head toward Earth. Those that do usually take three to four days to get here. This one took all of 17 hours and 40 minutes," he noted.

Below: SOHO coronagraphs captured this movie of a coronal mass ejection (CME) heading toward Earth on Oct. 22nd. NOAA forecasters expect the CME to cause a geomagnetic storm when it reaches Earth on or about Oct. 24th, but not as severe as the superstorm of 1859.

Not only was this coronal mass ejection an extremely fast mover, the magnetic fields contained within it were extremely intense and in direct opposition with Earth's magnetic fields. That meant the coronal mass ejection of September 1, 1859, overwhelmed Earth's own magnetic field, allowing charged particles to penetrate into Earth's upper atmosphere. The endgame to such a stellar event is one heck of a light show and more -- including potential disruptions of electrical grids and communications systems.

Back in 1859 the invention of the telegraph was only 15 years old and society's electrical framework was truly in its infancy. A 1994 solar storm caused major malfunctions to two communications satellites, disrupting newspaper, network television and nationwide radio service throughout Canada. Other storms have affected systems ranging from cell phone service and TV signals to GPS systems and electrical power grids. In March 1989, a solar storm much less intense than the perfect space storm of 1859 caused the Hydro-Quebec (Canada) power grid to go down for over nine hours, and the resulting damages and loss in revenue were estimated to be in the hundreds of millions of dollars.

"The question I get asked most often is, 'Could a perfect space storm happen again, and when?'" added Tsurutani. "I tell people it could, and it could very well be even more intense than what transpired in 1859. As for when, we simply do not know," he said.

To research the "perfect space storm" of 1859, Tsurutani and co-writers Walter Gonzalez, of the Brazilian National Space Institute, and Gurbax Lakhina and Sobhana Alex, of the India Institute of Geomagnetism, used previously reported ground, solar and auroral observations, and recently re-discovered ground-based magnetic- field data from Colaba Observatory in India. The findings were published in a recent issue of the Journal of Geophysical Research."

Feb. 6, 2002 -- Astronauts love space walks. Floating weightless hundreds of kilometers above Earth, the terrain below racing by at 17,000 mph --no space traveler wants it to end. But it only takes two words to send one of those brave explorers racing back to their craft: "Solar flare!"

"Solar flares are the biggest explosions in the solar system," says Robert Lin of UC Berkeley's Space Science Lab. "They erupt near sunspots with the force of a hundred million hydrogen bombs." Astronauts caught spacewalking during a solar flare or one of their cousins, a coronal mass ejection, can absorb a radiation dose equivalent to 100 chest x-rays -- reason enough to dash for shelter.

Above: Astronaut Steven Smith floats above Earth during shuttle mission STS-103. [more]

Flares pose little direct danger to Earth dwellers because our planet's atmosphere protects us from their deadly radiation. But unpredictable solar explosions do affect our lives. They can disable satellites, scramble aircraft navigation, and interrupt high-frequency radio communications for hours.

Sign up for EXPRESS SCIENCE NEWS delivery
"One of the most amazing things about solar flares," says Brian Dennis of NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center, "is the efficient way they accelerate subatomic particles to energies exceeding 109 eV." As much as 50% of the total explosion energy emerges as electrons and atomic nuclei traveling at nearly the speed of light. "Flares operate much more efficiently than any particle accelerator we've been able to build here on Earth."
"How do flares do that?" he asks. We don't know, but terrestrial particle physicists would love to find out.

What ignites solar flares? How do they unleash so much energy so quickly? And is it possible to predict when they will happen?

Such questions have vexed astronomers since 1859 when Lord Carrington spotted a solar flare for the first time. "I was [counting sunspots on a projected image of the Sun]," he recalled, when suddenly "two patches of intensely bright and white light broke out" near a remarkably large sunspot group. "Flurried by the surprise," Carrington rushed from his telescope to call a second witness, but by the time he returned minutes later the outburst had vanished.

Left: A 4.2 MB mpeg movie shows a solar flare in action, blasting hot gas away from the limb of the Sun. [more]

Carrington knew he had glimpsed something enormously powerful, but what he saw was just the tip of the iceberg. Fast-moving particles that emerge from flares radiate mostly high-energy x-rays and gamma-rays. Lower-energy visible light isn't as important.

And therein lies the reason that flares have been able to guard their secrets for so long. The explosions are brightest at wavelengths that Earthbound observers can't see with their eyes. Telescopes are hobbled, too, because our atmosphere is opaque to x-rays and gamma-rays.

Now a new NASA satellite aims to change all that. The High Energy Solar Spectroscopic Imager (HESSI for short), launched on Feb. 5, 2002, is orbiting Earth nearly 600 km above our planet's obscuring atmosphere, where it can record x-ray and gamma-ray emissions from flares. HESSI isn't the first spacecraft capable of detecting such radiation. But it will be the first to capture crisp hard x-ray and gamma-ray images of the violent explosions.

"The angular resolution of HESSI's hard x-ray images will be about 2 arcseconds or about as good as you could get from an optical telescope on the ground." says Lin, the mission's principal investigator. The gamma-ray images will be a little less detailed, with resolutions between 7 and 36 arcseconds. But, Lin notes enthusiastically, "we've never seen any gamma-ray image of a solar flare before." HESSI's will be the first.

Right: An artist's rendering of HESSI in orbit 600 kilometers above Earth. [more information]

To put these numbers into perspective, consider the following: When a solar flare erupts, it heats a region of the Sun's atmosphere many Earth-diameters across. (What Carrington saw in 1859 was the white light "bloom" from such a flare.) HESSI's hard x-ray images will reveal details only 1700 km wide -- about the distance between Los Angeles and Seattle.

That's amazing because such high-energy x-rays and gamma-rays can't be focused; they fly right through conventional lenses. Instead, HESSI forms images by looking at the Sun through finely-spaced parallel slats --like microscopic Venetian blinds-- that cast shadows across onboard radiation detectors. "We'll rotate the spacecraft every 4 seconds to create a modulation pattern from the shadows that we can analyze to form an image of the Sun," explains Lin. The process is similar to a medical x-ray, except scientists are interested in the source of the rays (the Sun), not the material that blocks them (the slats).

HESSI's cameras can make pictures of the entire Sun, but researchers will be especially interested in sunspots. "That's where flares erupt -- in the vicinity of sunspots with intense, twisted magnetic fields," says George Fisher, a colleague of Lin's at Berkeley. "Twisted magnetic fields are like rubber bands stretched taut," he explained. "They want to snap back -- violently. Reconnecting fields are probably the power source for flares."

At least that's what most solar physicists believe. The problem is, no one has ever seen it happen. "Before HESSI we couldn't locate the onset of an eruption with sufficient precision to make the connection between flares and kinks in the magnetic field," says Fisher. "I'm dying to know where flare particles are accelerated, and I think HESSI is finally going to show us."

HESSI's job is important fundamental physics, adds NASA's mission scientist Brian Dennis. Understanding how flares work could teach us how to build better particle accelerators on Earth and maybe even advance the cause of fusion power, which also involves superheated gases threaded by magnetic fields.

Left: Inside the CERN high-energy particle accelerator in Geneva. Basic research on solar flares might one day improve such devices on Earth. © CERN Geneva

HESSI's findings will also shed light on mysterious happenings far outside our solar system. "Whatever triggers solar flares could be the same mechanism that blasts jets of particles from the magnetized accretion disks of black holes and neutron stars," says Dennis. "The Sun is comparatively nearby, so it's a natural laboratory for studying such exotic processes."

Meanwhile most astronauts would be satisfied with simple timely predictions of garden-variety solar flares, a potential spinoff of the HESSI mission. If the spacecraft can accomplish that one thing, space will become a safer place ... for everyone.

Editor's note: Solar flares are closely related to coronal mass ejections (CMEs) -- billion-ton clouds of gas that billow away from the Sun and trigger geomagnetic storms when they strike Earth's magnetosphere. Scientists once thought flares propelled CMEs into space, but we've since learned that flares and CMEs can happen together or separately. Perhaps the two are different aspects of the same kind of explosion triggered by changing magnetic fields on the Sun. No one is sure. "One of HESSI's goals is to understand the relationship between solar flares and CMEs," says Dennis. [Listen to Bob Lin discuss CMEs]."

Edited by bd bucketingdown (02/03/2012 18:57)

#1084327 - 02/03/2012 19:05 Re: Temperature trends [Re: bd bucketingdown]
bd bucketingdown Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 07/02/2008
Posts: 6033
Loc: Eastern A/Hills SA
Plus and that is just a small part of what all these various solar outputs do and how much the change in energy output crikey and cb.

"June 10, 2005: January 2005 was a stormy month--in space. With little warning, a giant spot materialized on the sun and started exploding. Between January 15th and 19th, sunspot 720 produced four powerful solar flares. When it exploded a fifth time on January 20th, onlookers were not surprised.

They should have been. Researchers realize now that the January 20th blast was something special. It has shaken the foundations of space weather theory and, possibly, changed the way astronauts are going to operate when they return to the Moon.

Sunspot 720 unleashed a new kind of solar storm.

Scant minutes after the January 20th flare, a swarm of high-speed protons surrounded Earth and the Moon. Thirty minutes later, the most intense proton storm in decades was underway.

"We've been hit by strong proton storms before, but [never so quickly]," says solar physicist Robert Lin of UC Berkeley. "Proton storms normally develop hours or even days after a flare."This one began in minutes.

Right: The Jan. 20th proton storm photographed from space by the Solar and Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO). The many speckles are solar protons striking the spacecraft's digital camera. [More]

Proton storms cause all kinds of problems. They interfere with ham radio communications. They zap satellites, causing short circuits and computer reboots. Worst of all, they can penetrate the skin of space suits and make astronauts feel sick. "

#1084336 - 02/03/2012 19:17 Re: Temperature trends [Re: bd bucketingdown]
bd bucketingdown Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 07/02/2008
Posts: 6033
Loc: Eastern A/Hills SA

Persistent Solar Influence on North Atlantic Climate During the Holocene

Gerard Bond1,*,
Bernd Kromer2,
Juerg Beer3,
Raimund Muscheler3,
Michael N. Evans4,
William Showers5,
Sharon Hoffmann1,
Rusty Lotti-Bond1,
Irka Hajdas6 and
Georges Bonani6

+ Author Affiliations

1 Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University, Route 9W, Palisades, NY 10964, USA.

2 Heidelberg Academy of Sciences, Institute of Environmental Physics, INF 229, D-69120 Heidelberg, Germany.

3 Eidgenössische Anstalt für Wasserversorgung, Abwasswerreinigung und Gewuässerschutz, Ueberlandstrasse 133, Postfach 611, CH-8600 Duebendorf, Switzerland.

4 Laboratory of Tree-Ring Research, University of Arizona, 105 West Stadium, Tucson, AZ 8572, USA.

5 Department of Marine, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, North Carolina State University, 1125 Jordan Hall, Raleigh, NC 27695–8208, USA.

6 Accelerator Mass Spectrometry

14 C Lab, ITP Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Hoenggerberg, CH-8093 Zurich, Switzerland.


Surface winds and surface ocean hydrography in the subpolar North Atlantic appear to have been influenced by variations in solar output through the entire Holocene. The evidence comes from a close correlation between inferred changes in production rates of the cosmogenic nuclides carbon-14 and beryllium-10 and centennial to millennial time scale changes in proxies of drift ice measured in deep-sea sediment cores. A solar forcing mechanism therefore may underlie at least the Holocene segment of the North Atlantic's “1500-year” cycle. The surface hydrographic changes may have affected production of North Atlantic Deep Water, potentially providing an additional mechanism for amplifying the solar signals and transmitting them globally.

#1084345 - 02/03/2012 19:25 Re: Temperature trends [Re: bd bucketingdown]
bd bucketingdown Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 07/02/2008
Posts: 6033
Loc: Eastern A/Hills SA

The Holocene Asian Monsoon: Links to Solar Changes and North Atlantic Climate

Yongjin Wang1,
Hai Cheng1,2,*,
R. Lawrence Edwards2,
Yaoqi He1,
Xinggong Kong1,
Zhisheng An3,
Jiangying Wu1,
Megan J. Kelly2,
Carolyn A. Dykoski2,
Xiangdong Li4

+ Author Affiliations

1 College of Geography Science, Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing 210097, China.

2 Department of Geology and Geophysics, University of Minnesota, MN 55455, USA.

3 State Key Lab of Loess and Quaternary Geology, Institute of Earth Environment, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Xi'an 71005, China.

4 Department of Civil and Structural Engineering, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom, Kowloon, Hong Kong.

↵* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail:


A 5-year-resolution absolute-dated oxygen isotope record from Dongge Cave, southern China, provides a continuous history of the Asian monsoon over the past 9000 years. Although the record broadly follows summer insolation, it is punctuated by eight weak monsoon events lasting ∼1 to 5 centuries. One correlates with the “8200-year” event, another with the collapse of the Chinese Neolithic culture, and most with North Atlantic ice-rafting events. Cross-correlation of the decadal- to centennial-scale monsoon record with the atmospheric carbon-14 record shows that some, but not all, of the monsoon variability at these frequencies results from changes in solar output.

#1084351 - 02/03/2012 19:38 Re: Temperature trends [Re: bd bucketingdown]
bd bucketingdown Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 07/02/2008
Posts: 6033
Loc: Eastern A/Hills SA
And one more though I could go on for hours crikey and CB...Solar Storms Destroy Earth's Ozone Layer

"by Environmental News Network

Last year extreme ultraviolet cameras on board the orbiting Solar and Heliospheric Observatory captured this image of a prominence above the eastern limb of the Sun.

The Earth's ozone layer is destroyed not only by human use of ozone depleting chemicals, but also by large solar storms, new research confirms.

A solar flare with an associated coronal mass ejection sent positively charged protons streaming to Earth from July 14 to 16, 2000. The bombardment of protons, called a solar proton event, was the third largest in the last 30 years.

Now a year later, new evidence from U.S. Earth orbiting satellites is helping scientists better understand how solar events such as this one affect the planet.

Large solar storms rain electrically charged particles down on Earth's atmosphere and deplete the upper-level ozone for weeks to months according to a study in the August 1 issue of the journal "Geophysical Research Letters."

"A lot of impacts on ozone are very subtle and happen over long periods of time," said Charles Jackman, a researcher at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center's Laboratory for Atmospheres and lead author of the study. "But when these solar proton events occur you can see immediately a change in the atmosphere, so you have a clear cause and effect."

Jackman and his colleagues examined impacts of a series of huge solar explosions on the atmosphere in the Northern Hemisphere with the help of data gathered by satellites operated by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

Jackman said, "You have to first be able to separate the natural effects on ozone, before you can tease out humankind's impacts."

Chlorine and bromine are linked to ozone decline which allows more of the Sun's UV rays to hit the Earth, resulting in more skin cancers and optical damage in humans and animals. Most of the chlorine and bromine comes from human produced compounds such as chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and halon gas.

Solar storms consist of coronal mass ejections and solar flares, the researchers explain. Coronal mass ejections are huge bubbles of gas ejected from the Sun and are often associated with these flares. Solar flares are explosions on the Sun that happen when energy stored in twisted magnetic fields, usually above sunspots, is suddenly released.

When protons like these bombard the upper atmosphere, they break up molecules of gases like nitrogen and water vapor. Once freed, those atoms react with ozone molecules and reduce the ozone layer.

When atmospheric winds blow nitrogen oxides down into the middle stratosphere, they can stay there for months, and continue to keep ozone at a reduced level.

When bombarded with protons from the Sun, water vapor molecules break up into forms where they react with ozone. These molecules, called hydrogen oxides, only last during the time period of the solar proton event.

But these short-term effects of hydrogen oxides can destroy up to 70 percent of the ozone in the another atmospheric layer known as the middle mesosphere.

Jackman and the other investigators used measurements from the Halogen Occultation Experiment (HALOE) instrument aboard the Upper Atmosphere Research Satellite (UARS) and the Solar Backscatter Ultraviolet (SBUV/2) instrument aboard the NOAA-14 satellite to obtain data on amounts of atmospheric gases like ozone and oxides of nitrogen in different layers of the atmosphere in the Northern Hemisphere.

The investigators then compared readings before and during the July 2000 solar event.

"If you look at the total atmospheric column, from your head on up to the top of the atmosphere, this solar proton event depleted less than one percent of the total ozone in the Northern Hemisphere," Jackman said. While the solar event's impact on humans was negligible, it helped scientists verify their computer models.

On July 23, an advanced environmental satellite equipped with instruments to monitor Earth's weather and with a telescope that will be used to detect solar storms was launched from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Florida.

NOAA's Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite (GOES-M) is the first of the GOES satellites equipped with a Solar X-ray Imager which will be used to forecast Earth space weather due to solar activity."

#1084352 - 02/03/2012 19:39 Re: Temperature trends [Re: bd bucketingdown]
ROM Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 29/01/2007
Posts: 6628
Crikey; Easy answer to that apparent differences in those land temperatures over the six months.

There is an unequal distribution of land and water between the two hemispheres. The Southern Hemisphere has less land and more water.

The Northern hemisphere is about 60.7% water and 39.3% land.

The Southern hemisphere is about 80.9% water and 19.1% land.

The change from summer to winter temperatures in the northern hemisphere over a land mass that is over twice the size of of the southern hemisphere's land total mass area will distort the land temperature data.

To make it even worse, the Antarctic continent which is over 1.5 times the size of Australia but with a summer temp of -27C and a winter temp of -60C is included in that southern hemisphere land area.

You have to think global on so much of this stuff and not get trapped into thinking just local as that immediately and severely limits one's viewpoint.

#1084353 - 02/03/2012 19:42 Re: Temperature trends [Re: bd bucketingdown]
bd bucketingdown Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 07/02/2008
Posts: 6033
Loc: Eastern A/Hills SA
Now, how do all those powerful solar changes and effects compare to your CO2 small ppm increase-small temp increase effects?!

Edited by bd bucketingdown (02/03/2012 19:43)

#1084380 - 02/03/2012 20:35 Re: Temperature trends [Re: bd bucketingdown]
crikey Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 01/02/2011
Posts: 2949
Loc: Tweed Heads
from what l have generally read. The solar output does not vary enough to have caused the increasing global temp change

This article infers that even the Maunder minimum was more likely caused by volcanic activity as the major contributor to cooling
what they are inferring that solar minimum on its own won't cut it for a strong drop in global temps
Variations in total solar irradiance were too small to detect with technology available before the satellite era, although the small fraction in ultra-violet light has recently been found to vary significantly more than previously thought over the course of a solar cycle.[2] Total solar output is now measured to vary (over the last three 11-year sunspot cycles) by approximately 0.1%,[3][4][5] or about 1.3 Watts per square meter (W/m2) peak-to-trough from solar maximum to solar minimum during the 11-year sunspot cycle.
The amount of solar radiation received at the outer surface of Earth's atmosphere averages 1366 W/m2.[1][6][7] There are no direct measurements of the longer-term variation, and interpretations of proxy measures of variations differ. The intensity of solar radiation reaching Earth has been relatively constant through the last 2000 years, with variations estimated at around 0.1-0.2%.[8][9][10] Solar variation, together with volcanic activity are hypothesized to have contributed to climate change, for example during the Maunder Minimum. However, changes in solar brightness are too weak to explain recent climate change.[11]

I find it quite interesting that despite solar variability and volcanic eruptions in the past 100 years. The globes temp is on the incline
I will be feeling more comfortable when global temps drop into negative temp anomaly once again!!
When are the skeptics expecting this to happen.?
what year?

#1084386 - 02/03/2012 20:49 Re: Temperature trends [Re: crikey]
crikey Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 01/02/2011
Posts: 2949
Loc: Tweed Heads
Thanks for that ROM Yes that makes sense
Quite amazing that when the sun shines on land in the nth hemisphere in their summer,( june july) average mean global temp climbs some 10 deg in 6 months ( never mind the insignificant mean global anomalies of a few tenths of a degree)

and quite fascinating to see the relative stability of the oceans as slow absorbers and emitters of heat.

So if there is a lot of cloud over the nth hemisphere land mass in their summer the globe will not heat as much but if there are lots of big high pressure cells over land with stalling highs. Then the mean global temp , sky rockets

So cloud cover and MSLP patterns become important in regulating nth hemisphere land temp trends

#1084435 - 02/03/2012 22:02 Re: Temperature trends [Re: crikey]
ROM Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 29/01/2007
Posts: 6628
crikey I'm going to put up a series of url's for articles here as they all tie in together over a time period. If I attempted to type all this out I would be here all night so I'll let you and others interested do their own thinking.

Now this is all to do with global cloud cover, the way in which this cloud cover may be affected and varied by the effects of the sun and therefore the manner in which global temperatures might be affected.

The way the sun varies which was believed by all the experts and researchers to be almost less than about .1% in it's Total Solar Irradiance [ TSI ] has been badly shaken by new satellite data.
And as the sun is the ONLY source of energy for this planet, anything that goes on up there will affect and drive our global climate

1 / It is to do with; Dr Henrik Svensmark of the Danish National Space Centre in Copenhagen has pioneered the study of the effects of cosmic rays on cloud formation. The GWPF put a series of questions to him concerning the recent results from CERN’s CLOUD experiment.

The Cosmic-Ray/Cloud Seeding Hypothesis Is Converging With Reality

2 / CERN Finds "Significant" Cosmic Ray Cloud Effect

But the effect was far too small to account for changes in the global cloud cover .

3 / Roy Spencer's take on the subject and his change in attitude to Svensmark's theory and actual observed data, not modeled data.
Indirect Solar Forcing of Climate by Galactic Cosmic Rays: An Observational Estimate

4 / And NOW the unexpected and unforeseen as Nature so often does to the believers in some fixed and unchangeable belief.

Calder's Updates;[ Nigel Calder is i think a physicist ]

Yet another trick of cosmic rays.
In the climax to the Danes’ experiments, cloud seeds flout the theories.

And you can bet that there is one hell of a lot more of Nature's tricks still to come as she plays further unexpected tricks on puny and arrogant mankind.
Unexpected and unforeseen Solar influences of a major nature are increasingly coming to be seen as the driver of the global climate, modified in regional areas by the short, intermediate and long cycles of oceans and the atmosphere, complicated to many orders of magnitude by the incredibly complex interactions between the oceans and the atmosphere and their cycles.

CO2 is a bit player of increasingly little consequence to the global climate and it's changes and the manner in which it is always changing.

And when is it going to cool and the global temperatures start to drop?
Maybe that is already happening starting in about 2006.

[url= ]The long sunspot cycle 23 predicts a significant temperature decrease in cycle 24 [/url]
This only one peer reviewed paper out of many with this theme.

Ole Humlum runs the very good climate information and and climate historical blog "Climate4you"

David Archibalds' posts on WUWT, Archibald from WA concentrates on the solr cycles and there potential affect on the world food supplies if and possibly when there is a dramatic cooling of the planet in the years ahead.

Give me a warming world anytime.
A cold world is a dry barren world that has difficulty in supporting much life.
A warm world is a wet world that has an immense proliferation of life. the tropics versus the Arctic /Antarctic.

And if it wasn't for the abject stupidity of the global warmers with their constant claims that if we warm we will have a global catastrophe, this warming that we have been having would have been welcomed with great glee as productivity and food production and al of life for most on this planet would have been for the better.

After all during the Jurassic and Cretaceous period of the great dinosaurs, the land temperatures were 6C up to 12C higher than the present.
The ocean water temperatures were 15C to 20C. Today the world's ocean average temperature is 3.4C
The CO2 was up around 1700 to 2000 ppm. 5 times that of today.
And the animals were immense in both size and numbers as was vegetation growth to keep those immense beasts in tucker.
And there was enough foliage left over to lay down even more immense coal beds which we mine today

Earth’s Climate History
2. Jurassic and Cretaceous: the climate of dinosaurs.


#1084464 - 02/03/2012 23:30 Re: Temperature trends [Re: Locke]
Vlasta Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 24/01/2008
Posts: 972
Loc: Melbourne Seaford
Originally Posted By: Locke
Do we have the UAH value for Fenruary yet?

Not yet , my shot is -0.16
Let you guys think for a second about crikey's comment above . Will we see ( CRU graph was posted )it to go to negativ ?
WOW , the little neg woke up a genius ( I settle for a nerd lol )
Let me think about it for a couple of days , I think its bigger than any gate so far .
Simply its so obvious , that I cant believe I was the one to nail it .

#1084473 - 03/03/2012 00:12 Re: Temperature trends [Re: Vlasta]
ROM Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 29/01/2007
Posts: 6628
CB I think you asked about the warming in the high latitudes in that first post .
There is a series on this by this author.

This how it is done!;

Hansen Warming Things Up In Reykjavik

And ; Iceland Adjustments Spread To Norway And Russia

The GHCN does not have any stations above 85 degrees so all those hot Arctic temperatures you see are infilled temperatures using a 1200 km radius box around the closest station.

And then GHCN run by Tom Karl I think, a full blown member of the CRU Hockey Team [ you should read what luke warmer Pielke Sr implies about him ] adjusts them and then Hansen gets his turn to do some more adjusting and so we get a nice toasty mirage world coming up.
Meanwhile the snow gets thicker and deeper in places that haven't seen snow for generation[s]

#1084479 - 03/03/2012 01:06 Re: Temperature trends [Re: ROM]
Simmosturf Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 17/03/2008
Posts: 1620
Loc: Wangaratta
Crikey, Crikey.. If the sun went out tomorrow, what would happen to our yummy warm life giving planet????

Page 63 of 117 < 1 2 ... 61 62 63 64 65 ... 116 117 >

Moderator:  Lindsay Knowles 
Who's Online
23 registered (Rain Goblin, Simmo FNQ, Funkyseefunkydo, desieboy, Drought declared, Rhys., Jesse24, Pacman, pagey, shanebat, Rainwoman_08, StormQueen, Taylsy, Flowin, Raweth, mysteriousbrad, Aussea, Mcbobbings, MattS, WANDJINA G'vale, 3 invisible), 122 Guests and 3 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Today's Birthdays
FarrSports, Knut, Moon-Child, Pharbelle
Forum Stats
29890 Members
32 Forums
24116 Topics
1521579 Posts

Max Online: 2985 @ 26/01/2019 12:05
Satellite Image