Does Anybody Really Know What TSI It Is?

I was generally trying to get ‘restarted’ after some changes at work increased my workload ( the two senior folks “moved on” leaving me as ‘most senior’…) and was looking for a new “muse”. Landed on an interesting paper by Habibullo. He thinks a new Little Ice Age is coming.

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/originals/grand_minimum.pdf


GRAND MINIMUM OF THE TOTAL SOLAR IRRADIANCE LEADS TO THE LITTLE ICE AGE
by Habibullo Abdussamatov | November 25, 2013
Source: Published Nestor-Istoriya, St. Petersburg, October 2013, ISBN 978-5-44690-122-7, –246 p., in Russian. abduss@gao.spb.ru

I had the pleasure to meet him once in Chicago. An energetic and focused man. One of those folks you meet and just KNOW they are meticulous and through. Someone who speaks the truth as they understand it, come what may. I like him.

So he thinks we enter a new little ice age about now as we come off the “top” of the present solar cycle (the top of which is rather like the bottom of prior ones… IMHO… with snow in Cairo and Israel..) Then it gets worse to about 2060. The paper is a short easy read, so I’ll leave it to folks to get the details there. There is a bit of Russian affect in the language, so it helps if you are not too hung up on agreement of number and such from an English point of view. Personally, I like the “accent”. Somehow if feels like a Great Russian Bear….

At any rate, one thing in it got me pondering. He has a graph showing TSI dropping by an expected 6 Watts or so. Yikes! I’ve been indoctrinated into the Solar Constant meme and find that a big number. So I go off looking for where that does not agree with Received Wisdom. OK, lots of nice smooth charts showing about 1361 W/m^2 with a small 1.5 or so wobble over the recorded sunspot cycles. While H.A. has it as 1366 now dropping to 1360 as things get cold. Who is right?

The Trouble With TSI

The basic problem is that we don’t measure TSI as defined. We measured a subset of the spectrum near earth for most of the record. Only recently do we have really decent data. The prior measurements are more scattered in range. The solution?

Homogenize!

Sigh. Where have we seen this before…

I ran into a site that does into it in far more depth than I would, so I’m going to put a link here to them. It looks well done. As a sidebar: The guy has a chip on his shoulder about gravity and several postings claiming that gravity isn’t as claimed… OK, there ARE issues with gravity and nobody knows how it works, so maybe he is onto something or maybe his a bit off kilter. Just don’t let that get in the way of reading the stuff on TSI. It looks well researched.

https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2012/12/10/1366-and-all-that-the-secret-history-of-total-solar-irradiance/

The “net net” of it all is that early readings are 1366 and recent are 1361 (ish) but they are computer model adjusted to be a flat “solar constant”… Who’s right? Well, it comes down to “Who do you trust?” as it’s based on hypotheticals. Sigh.

What gets it for me is this graph showing the relative data of different measuring devices and the second one showing the different spectrum they measure. As we have only now learned that a quiet sun shifts spectrum rather a lot, and mostly in the poorly sampled UV ranges, we simply don’t have the data to say how much power was really being radiated when and measured by what instrument, as they didn’t cover the whole spectrum and the adjustments to calibrate to a ‘solar constant’ are more assumption than observation.

TSI Observations

TSI Observations

The Composting happens:

Dice and Splice the data to make a smooth trend

Dice and Splice

In my opinion, it all comes down to this gem, showing how each measures a different thing:

Each instrument measured a different batch of frequencies

Who measured what when

Just how can you get any information about TSI change that depends on shifting how much energy is in which frequencies when you didn’t measure them all?

So, in the end, we really don’t know what historic TSI has been. We have some proxies. We have some very limited measured subset of frequencies. And we have a whole lot of hand waving to make it fit the narrative of a Solar Constant.

Personally, since that leaves us with “Who do you trust?”, I trust Habibulo. I don’t trust NASA, given their propensity for social activism, noble cause corruption, and having kept Hansen around well past his “sell by” date…

In Conclusion

At any rate, I’m getting the rest of my life restarted after a bunch of changes. Hopefully I can ramp back up to full speed here. It looks like the next decade or two will be cold, and then who knows. Place your bets.

I’ve also become a bit more skeptical about TSI as Solar Constant and a lot more wondering what our variable star will do next.

About E.M.Smith

A technical managerial sort interested in things from Stonehenge to computer science. My present "hot buttons' are the mythology of Climate Change and ancient metrology; but things change...
This entry was posted in AGW Climate Perspective, AGW Science and Background, Earth Sciences, Science Bits and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

66 Responses to Does Anybody Really Know What TSI It Is?

  1. Dell wilson says:

    “I don’t trust NASA, given their propensity for social activism, noble cause corruption, and having kept Hansen around well past his “sell by” date…”

    This is a really sad statement. Even more sad because I and, I would guess, so many other feel the same way. NASA is one of the premier science organizations in the world, at least has been. They’ve capture out imagination and taken us to great heights. This is even more sad to me as a Huntsville resident because I know this social activism isn’t universal and probably doesn’t even exist locally.

  2. Heber Rizzo says:

    It´s great to have you around again!

  3. vukcevic says:

    Hi EM
    Nice to see you are back .
    In my view Habibullo is overcooking it a bit; I personally think early 1900’s temps are most likely outcome by 2030s and then recovery (110-ish year cycle and all that) .
    Anyhow, here is one of his recent articles (April 2013)
    http://www.omicsgroup.org/journals/grand-minimum-of-the-total-solar-irradiance-leads-to-the-little-ice-age-2329-6755.1000113.pdf
    with the TSI graph (Fig5, page6) falling of cliff.

  4. John Robertson says:

    Nice to hear from you.
    We are merely seconds away from witchcraft, each time we attempt to comprehend the majesty of nature.
    Nature/Everything/God/That what Is.Your choice.
    As you state, the data does not yet exist, or is not yet recognized, to allow us to form a testable hypothesis.
    However I appreciate your speculation, as it is well reasoned, incorporates what little we know and points to paths of investigation.Which I promise to read later today.
    You are acting as a scientist.
    Merry Christmas.

  5. Verity Jones says:

    Glad to have you back on form. My blogging hiatus continues – also due to workload, but Christmas is coming!

  6. it will not be colder, or warmer – the self adjusting mechanism is perfect. When it get warmer (as contemporary propaganda says) oxygen & nitrogen expand INSTANTLY; troposphere becomes as bigger ”radiator for cooling” and readjusts in a jiffy. When it gets colder for ANY reason -> troposphere shrinks INSTANTLY and loses less heat = overall temp stays the same. Coolings / warmings are ALWAYS localized: http://globalwarmingdenier.wordpress.com/climate/

  7. philjourdan says:

    I am not sure I have the confidence you do in Habibula, but I do like his analysis. Those who are thinking outside the box are getting us closer to understanding the factors affecting the climate. The team is the hindrance to science in this regard.

  8. Zeke says:

    1. The ocean as the chief source of co2 exhalation is important to keep in mind.
    2. I think he is right in observing that even non-significant changes in TSI for a sustained period changes the overall climate zones of earth.
    3. I do not think any prediction can be made personally but perhaps there is something to rhythmic movement through our galaxy affecting solar activity.

    I enjoyed the paper, thanks. And thanks to the sun for the pause. Everyone who likes to live without fossil fuels and modern agriculture, please have the courage of your convictions and join a commune and leave the rest of us alone. Could any of these ninnies last 2 years under their own system in a commune?

  9. Sera says:

    We have just enough information to make wild-assed assumptions. Not just for TSI, but for a lot of things in Climate Science™. Good to see the return of the Cheifio- we were just rearranging the deck chairs in your absence.

  10. Judy F. says:

    Yay!!! EM is back!
    I hope your life gets back to a more normal state.

    Someplace ( I don’t know where) I read that illness was prevalent during the Dark Ages because of a change in the UV levels. A lower UV meant that “germs” were not killed that normally would be, which led to the outbreaks of plague and other diseases. It would be interesting to see if there are changes that can now be tracked, that we have been unable to measure before.

  11. Graeme No.3 says:

    Welcome back. A Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to you and your loved ones.

    And my Best Wishes also to your readers.

  12. Eric Fithian says:

    As we are all saying, “Welcome back!”
    I have great respect for Russian science; their engineering, not so much…!
    Their political organizations– best not say…
    If the Russians say, “It’s going to be cold,” one would be well advised to stock up on heavy clothing and vitamins…!

    Or move to a decent-sized tropical landmass. With plenty of ammo….

  13. craigm350 says:

    Reblogged this on CraigM350 and commented:
    Welcome back!

  14. David A says:

    Very nice to hear from you again. Open minded brilliance, mixed with the natural humility of a true scientific mind, you have been missed. Merry Christmas to you and yours.

  15. A C Osborn says:

    It is very good to have you back on the blogs, (I saw you on WUWT as well).
    Tim Cullen has some brilliant work on his Malaga Bay site doesn’t he?

  16. A C Osborn says:

    PS You do realise that you are stepping on Mr (Solar Constant) Leif Svalgaard toes?
    He won’t be pleased with someone else questioning his absolute certainty.

  17. Lynn Clark says:

    Zeke said, “Could any of these ninnies last 2 years under their own system in a commune?”

    Anyone who’s seen the new Discovery Channel show “Naked and Afraid” can answer that. In almost all cases so far, the people on that show — most of them self-described survival experts…and you have to assume based on things they say, ardent environmentalists — come out at the end of their 21-day ordeal on the verge of starvation and death. Some don’t even make it that far on their own, dragged figuratively and literally to the end by their stronger-willed fellow traveler(s).

    In a recent edition of the Stossel show on Fox News Channel, it was pointed out that the inhabitants of the Jamestown colony in early America nearly starved to death the first two years they were there. The reason? The “powers that be” dictated in the colony’s charter that they practice socialism: everything owned by everyone, everyone equally benefitting from the labor of the collective. After the second year, Governor Bradford changed the rules, allocating parcels of land to each settler/family and allowing them to reap the fruits of their labors. In one year they went from near starvation to relative prosperity.

    Early Mormons in the 19th century tried socialism. They called it the United Order. Same results, so it only lasted a few years.

    Socialism is a nice theory, but it always bumps up against the immovable object of human nature.

  18. omanuel says:

    TSI seems to be another ill-defined shield from reality, like global temperature.

  19. Paul, Somerset says:

    @ A C Osborn: To be fair to Prof. Svalgaard, I believe that his objection to most claims of the sun having a major effect on climate on time-scales of less than millennia is that nobody shows how a minuscule fluctuation in incoming energy could cause the claimed differences at the earth’s surface.

    The Chiefio seems to be responding to that challenge by demonstrating that the fluctuations in the sun’s energy as experienced on our planet might possibly be greater than normally assumed.

    Don’t get me wrong. Like anyone who follows this debate on the blogs, I’d be disappointed if Leif didn’t show up to offer us some facts and figures we’d overlooked, But at least the Chiefio is moving the debate onwards a bit.

  20. Eric Barnes says:

    @Paul Somerset
    Lief doesn’t have any facts for us at the necessary timescales. He can delude himself with ridiculously short data sets though.
    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/01/14/total-solar-irradiation-tsi-value-lower-in-2008/#comment-574438

  21. omanuel says:

    To be fair, Prof. Svalgaard is invited to address in public three figures of precise experimental data from highly respected research groups (Brookhaven National Laboratory, the University of Chicago, Washington University, Cal Tech, UC-Berkeley, the 1957 paper by B2FH, the Galileo probe of Jupiter, Universität Bern, Physikalisches Institut, etc.) that provide clear and unequivocal evidence:
    1. Neutron repulsion is the source of energy in cores of heavy atoms and stars
    2. The Sun made our elements, birthed the solar system and sustains our lives
    3. Iron-56 is the most abundant and most stable atom in the Earth and the Sun

    https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10640850/Chapter_2.pdf

  22. philjourdan says:

    @Lynn Clark – You confused 2 colonies. Bradford was the Pilgrims at Plymouth rock. Jamestown had its own problems. Basically, they feared the Indians (Native Americans) and so would not let anyone out to hunt or farm or gather.

    But your narrative of the Pilgrims is correct. The first thanksgiving was not thanks to the Indians for showing them how to grow corn (they had done that the previous year, just before half the colony starved). It was thanks to God for a bountiful harvest after Bradford gave them each a plot of land to call their own and farm.

  23. Paul, Somerset says:

    @Eric Barnes: Thanks for that link. I think Leif’s key point, which he quotes twice in his responses in that thread, is: “Disagreement among overlapping observations […] indicates undetected drifts that suggest the TSI record is not sufficiently stable to discern solar changes on decadal time scales.”.

    We’re not really that far apart. The Chiefio’s point is that such disagreements and instabilities in the record of TSI offer all sorts of possible new lines of research. While, Leif, as a professional scientist, draws the equally valid conclusion that there is too much uncertainty in the TSI record to treat solar variance as a dominant driver of climate.

    The Chiefio’s approach is a lot more fun and offers more scope for investigation and new ways of understanding our climate, but if you need to make calculations on the basis of hard numbers and irrefutable assumptions, I can understand Leif’s reticence and insistence on solid numbers.

  24. p.g.sharrow says:

    I fear many “Scientists” prefer to have the answers, In hand, before they look for them. Dr Svalgaard studies the weather of the sun to understand the machinations that take place under the ground there. Specialists often have a problem seeing the whole forest as they study one kind of tree. Those of us less fixated, attempt to put the entire puzzle together. pg

  25. omanuel says:

    You are right, p.g. sharrow.

    I added this paragraph in the acknowledgments: “Kuroda never hinted what I would find when he made my research assignment in 1960, but the knowledge he displayed in 1956 of the infinite multiple constant in self-sustaining nuclear fission reactions [1.2, 1.3] persuades me he knew I would eventually discover the Sun’s pulsar core, if I remained faithful to basic principles
    of science
    .

  26. omanuel says:

    Our host realized that differences between the pre- and post-WWII flags of Japan might be of more than symbolic interest.

  27. p.g.sharrow says:

    omanuel says:
    17 December 2013 at 5:52 pm
    You are correct. We must seek the answers with an open mind and always be ready to discard favorite theories if new facts require a rebuild. As EMSmith says “Facts Just Are.” pg

  28. Bill says:

    Quote:
    “I’ve also become a bit more skeptical about TSI as Solar Constant and a lot more wondering what our variable star will do next.”

    Vary? Again? …and again?
    The best evidence of past climate shifts is gone. Burned by the Catholic Pilgrims preading Christianity, destroying anything Pagan or otherwise Godly, as long as it was alien to their own doctrine. We are left with good, solid evidence going back about 800 – 1,000 years then poof!
    Back to ice-cores and tree rings. Gases permeate through compressed ice and tree rings don’t last forever, so we need something else.
    Maybe the Vatican library vaults hold the key….talking of which, I wonder who has it?

  29. John Robertson says:

    Tall Blokes Site November 2012, Tim Cullen, seems a reasonable take on the possibility we are not yet measuring TSI in any manful way.
    Solar irradiation? Magnetic fluctuations, electric currents,interacting electromagnetic fields, seems to me our ignorance is profound.
    Do we have a handle on the totality of effects orbiting a variable star has on an orb such as earth?

  30. Eric Barnes says:

    @Paul, Somerset
    Have to disagree Paul. No conclusive data over the millenia says nothing about whether TSI varied or was constant over that time period.
    Leif’s position is an assumption of constant TSI which is on an equal footing with TSI variance considering the length (or lack of length) of the record.
    Leif cannot see his own prejudice, only others.

  31. p.g.sharrow says:

    There is one proxy for the solar output of energy and that is the total amount of ice at the poles. While orbital changes could have an effect, it would be over millions of years not thousands. We are getting a taste of changes in actual energy output right now. The sun was in a period of high output during the last century and is now quieting down and we will see an increase in polar ice cover. Just as we saw a decrease in ice cover over the last 50 years, there will be an increase over the next 50. EMSmith has pointed out a lag of 16 to 18 years due to energy circulation in the oceans. It appears we are now run out of the stored energy and it will be cold and wet turning to cold and dry until the sun warms in 30 years. pg

  32. John Simon says:

    What’s the latest on Katla? I’ due. TSI may be irrelevant for a while. Just sayin’.

  33. omanuel says:

    p.g. sharrow,

    It is possible that the air of superiority and the Japanese Flag of WWII both indicated knowledge of the power that Aston described in his 1922 Nobel lecture as “beyond the dreams of scientific fiction:” The Pulsar Sun

    Oliver

    Sent from my iPhone

  34. p.g.sharrow says:

    @omanuel; The air of superiority of preWWII Japanese existed generations before 1922. At the time of Pearl Harbor the Japanese had never lost a war. They had driven the Russians, Dutch, French, and Chinese from the Western Pacific and were on their way to finishing off the British. Only the Americans’ Pacific Fleet remained as a threat to total dominance. By late 1942 they had damaged or destroyed all major opposing warships in the pacific. Only the American carriers and their destroyer screen remained. Japanese High Command had NO idea of just how destructive an atomic device could be. Remember, military people learn from their LAST war. In 1940 Atomic weapons were not even accepted science fiction. Nether the Japanese nor the German felt they needed atomic weapons in 1940, they had nearly won. It was the westerners that were desperate for a miracle weapon. pg

  35. omanuel says:

    p.g.sharrow,

    You may be correct.

    However, anyone who studied the last paragraph of Aston’s Nobel Lecture must have known that the release of nuclear energy might “ignite all Earth’s hydrogen and be announced to the world as the birth of a new star” (approximate quote from memory). I.e., the basis of the atomic and hydrogen bombs were explained in Aston’s 1922 Nobel Lecture.

    It may be only a coincidence that the density of force fields emerging from the rising Sun in Japan’s WWII flag would become infinite at the solar core.

    The Japanese scientist that became my mentor in 1960 was brilliant and managed to direct me to discover most of the forbidden information without any hint of what I would find.

  36. On the one hand the IPCC is predicting an increase in global temperature by 2100. The recently published AR5 report shows a change of between 0.5 and 5.3 K. (“Summary for Policymakers” Figure SPM.7 | CMIP5 multi-model simulated time series from 1950 to 2100). One might think of the prediction as +2.9 +/- 2.4 K. Does anyone regard predictions with such a wide range of values as “Science”?

    On the other hand, Habibullo predicts a 1.2 K fall in temperature over the same time interval which falls outside the range predicted by the IPCC.

  37. omanuel says:

    The answer to the first question is this: Ancient mythology was more scientific than modern science.

    To continue the comparison of science with mythology, . . . in the closing paragraph of Aston’s 1922 Nobel Lecture,

    http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/chemistry/laureates/1922/aston-lecture.pdf

    Aston suggests that deviations from whole number multiples in weights of atoms reveals the source of energy of the Sun Goddess, Amaterasu, in Shinto mythology:

    http://www.ancient-mythology.com/japanese/amaterasu.php

  38. omanuel says:

    One news reporter seems aware of mankind’s selfish path to destruction.

    See Bill Moyers’ U-tube essay, “If More People Knew the Secrets, . . .”

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pFYb4gKEFl4&feature=youtu.be&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DpFYb4gKEFl4%26feature%3Dyoutu.be

  39. Bloke down the pub says:

    Good to see you back in the saddle.

  40. dougieh says:

    as others have said above, good to hear you are gradually getting back to a comfortable place where you can start posting again.
    your insights have been missed by me & others as shown on this thread, but we realize you & family come first.

    TSI – always wondered what Russian scientists make of their counterparts in the west ?

    all the best for Xmas & the new year to you & commentators/readers.

    ps – hope the Bunnies are ok back in Cal !!! or have they & you moved wholesale ?

  41. Tim Clark says:

    Glad you’re back, E.M. Hope you like you job, even if it’s more than you wanted perhaps.

    Dell wilson says:
    15 December 2013 at 6:56 pm
    NASA is a has been.

    Fixed

  42. omanuel says:

    I asked the House Committee on Space Science & Technology for help getting answers to two questions:

    https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10640850/WHY.pdf

    https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10640850/WHY.pdf

  43. omanuel says:

    Sixty-eight years of deceit will end if Congress demands answers to these two questions from the National Academy of Sciences.

  44. Pooh, Dixie says:

    E. M. Smith: You might find this somewhat of interest. Sources are a bit dated.

    What is Total Solar Irradiance (Really)? (Feb 21, 2009 through Apr 05, 2012)
    http://solarcycle24com.proboards.com/thread/468/total-solar-irradiance

  45. John Robertson says:

    I should have read the links all the way thro, Tim Cullen same author.
    Do we have enough info to define total solar irradiation?
    Is gravity fluctuation a part of TSI?
    We link gravity to mass, but a star is apparently burning its mass, so over time its mass must vary.
    Electricity and magnetism also hints at an interconnection to gravity, but it remains in the I don’t know area.
    Even electricity remains a mystery to science,we can work the electromagnetic forces to some small advantage, but we are still ignorant as to the actual mechanisms of electron flow, as in +ve to negative or vice versa?
    We claim knowledge in areas where we have merely accepted a convention that works(most of the time).
    As to what is the total energy output of the sun acting upon the earth, what of the speculated dark matter and dark energy?
    We have the means to measure what we know of, but how do we measure the very weak forces induced by known effects,do we have instruments accurate enough to identify the gaps in our knowledge?
    I expect some major reevaluations in the next few decades, simply because we have finally put instruments in place observing the sun.
    What of the electric universe?
    I remain willing to speculate, but lean to the least complicated explanations.
    I do not know always being the best starting point.
    As a one time atheist, I am always amused by the logical conclusion, the infinite majesty of reality, our ignorance before it, the observation of each question answered exposes a multitude of questions, the distinct possibility we can not ever comprehend enough of the universe to understand it.
    Brings me back to agreeing with the existence of a God(Greater all).
    Whatever we call it, we have so much to learn.
    Merry Christmas to all.

  46. omanuel says:

    The US climate movement succeeded in explaining:

    Sixty-eight years of deceit about the source of energy in cores of

    1. Heavy atoms like U and Pu;
    2. Some planets, like Jupiter;
    3. Ordinary stars, like the Sun; and
    4. Galaxies, like our Milky Way.

    Why post-1945 textbooks replaced Nobel laureate Aston’s valid “nuclear packing fraction” with Weizsacker’s invalid “nuclear binding energy.”

    Thank you, E.M., for the courage to challenge climate ‘science’ that falsely assumed constant output from a variable star.

    Merry Christmas & Happy New Year,
    Oliver K. Manuel

  47. p.g.sharrow says:

    The year is done, The winter solstice is upon us. Seasons greetings for the Yule and a joyous Christ Mass eve and a happy Christmas Day. This New Year may prove to be very interesting.
    May Mr&Mrs EM Smith have a prosperous new beginning. pg

  48. gallopingcamel says:

    p.g.,
    Amen to that. A merry Christmas to you and all your kin as well!

  49. Zeke says:

    Merry Christmas! You all keep me sharp and it is such a pleasure to know you. (:

  50. bruce says:

    yes indeed imagine how disappointed the witches and goblins are to realize the nights are getting shorter. well at least on the top side of the globe

  51. omanuel says:

    E.M. Smith,

    Steven,

    I am pleased to report that Suyts Space published my Christmas challenge to government scientists to let go of the tit to public research funds long enough to address the experimental data that directly falsify the consensus models of Earth’s climate, the Sun and the nucleus of atoms:

    http://suyts.wordpress.com/2013/12/23/forlorn-climate-beta-desperately-seeking-alpha-anarchist/#comment-117120

    Let’s see if they actually believe any of the garbage science they peddle to the public !

    Oliver K. Manuel
    Former NASA Principal
    Investigator for Apollo
    PhD, Nuclear Chemistry
    Postdoc, Space Physics

  52. Jason Calley says:

    Merry Christmas, E.M.! All the best to you and to yours.

    Thank you, thank you, thank you! You have been a treasure to anyone interested in the world of thought and to the search for what is true. The world is better because of you.

  53. R. de Haan says:

    Pierse Corbyn Presentation ELKE 2011:

  54. omanuel says:

    I agree, Piers Corbyn knows that the Sun controls Earth’s always changing climate and therefore makes better predictions than those making the predictions politicians want to hear.

    Hilary Ostrov of “The View from Here” has good insight into the problems that plague science and society today:

    http://hro001.wordpress.com/2013/12/27/climate-politics-choreography/

    The United Nations was formed on 24 Oct 1945 for commendable goals – to reduce nationalism and the possibility of nuclear annihilation.

    However, nuclear and solar sciences were altered in 1945-46 in ways that undercut the validity of post-WWII sciences: Textbooks replaced

    1. Aston’s valid “nuclear packing fraction” with Weizsacker’s invalid “nuclear binding energy.”

    2. Valid models of the iron-rich Sun with invalid models of hydrogen-filled stars.

    https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10640850/WHY.pdf

    And deprived humans of the greatest benefit of the scientific revolution:

    “Powers beyond the dreams of scientific fiction.” [See the last paragraph of Lord Francis William Aston’s Nobel Lecture on 12 Dec 1922]:

    http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/chemistry/laureates/1922/aston-lecture.pdf

    May the Force be with you,
    Oliver

  55. R. de Haan says:

    Oliver, thanks for the links.
    Have a look at this: Skunk Works “Cheap Energy for All” solution: A series produced 100MW compact fusion reactor that runs on plentiful and cheap deuterium and tritium (isotopes of hydrogen). https://www.solveforx.com/moonshots/solve-for-x-charles-chase-on-energy-for-everyone

  56. omanuel says:

    Diana West comes to an interesting conclusion about deception at the end of the Second World War:

    http://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2013/12/27/doug-proctor-essay-on-west-and-beyond/

  57. omanuel says:

    In Chapter 1, Diana West clearly states the problem that plagues the scientific community, the reason we cannot now answer “What is TSI?

    “Heirs to a false and hollow history, we become unwitting participants, perpetuating and entrenching many, many lies as we take our places in a secretly subverted pageant – and never know it,”

  58. David Ball says:

    It has been very busy around our house, so I haven’t had much time to read some of my favourite blogs. Pleased to find this post and the comments here today. Soooo tired of Dr. Svalgaard’s weak-ass dismissal of everything “non-Svalgaard”. Even though it is not my “field”, I can still detect bullshit when I read it. I cannot imagine what it would be like having him as an instructor!
    I always admire my fathers approach. Steadfast, unhurried, logical. He doesn’t care if his information “convinces” anyone. Take it or leave it.
    There are many things in science that under scrutiny of logic seem reasonable. Is it not unreasonable to assume, that if the earth has an iron/nickel core, that it is at least plausible that the sun may have similar? I am oversimplifying, but I think my point stands.
    Svalgaard’s “certainty” sets off all my bullshit-o-meters.
    Sad that politics today fills the role of the church in the past to suppress understanding.
    We are nearly as far from the first moon landing as the moon landing is from Kitty Hawk. What the hell?

  59. David Ball,
    It is not just Svaalgaard. Every member of the Hockey Team and their useful idiot supporters such as John Cook and Dana Nuccitelli share an unwarranted conviction of “Certainty”.

    Your bullshit meter is well calibrated. Well said!

  60. Zeke says:

    @galloping camel,

    It is convenient for there to be a solar scientist on WUWT to keep the lid on any theorizing about the sun’s variability and affects on climate.

  61. omanuel says:

    David, Zeke, Galloping Camel –

    I agree with your assessment of Dr. Svalgaard’s role at WUWT.

    You can check that out by going to WUWT and asking Dr. Svalgaard to respond to the three figures of precise experimental data in Chapter 2 of my autobiography that provide clear and unequivocal evidence for the Sun’s

    1. Pulsar core
    2. Iron-rich mantle, and
    3. Birth of the entire solar system

    I would confront him there myself if allowed to post on WUWT.

  62. omanuel says:

    George Orwell correctly predictied post-normal science when he started to write “Nineteen Eighty-four” in 1946, the same year that textbooks of

    1. Astronomy started teaching that the Sun is a giant ball of Hydrogen, and

    2. Nuclear physics and chemistry started replacing Lord Francis W. Aston’s valid “nuclear packing fraction” with von Weizsacker’s invalid “nuclear binding energy”.

    Here is a one page summary of the two questions Dr. Svalgaard needs to address, in public:

    https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10640850/WHY.pdf

    And here are three figures of precise experimental data that falsify the standard solar model:

    https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10640850/Chapter_2.pdf

    “Oh what a tangled web we weave
    When first we practice to deceive !

  63. omanuel says:

    We may have identified the problem, but the solution has escaped the best minds over the history of recorded history:

    Blaming others for the flaws that are in the very nature of mankind is NOT the solution.

    OUR flaws have prevented humans from advancing to the next stage of evolution.

    http://theinternetpost.net/2014/01/03/nazis/#comment-30015

    The turning point in mankind’s ability to use energy for the advancement of mankind was either:

    1. The atomic bomb that destroyed Hiroshima on 6 Aug 1945, or

    2. The 1,000 times more powerful Tsar bomb that the USSR exploded on 30 Oct 1961:

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=16cewjeqNdw&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D16cewjeqNdw

    Thank you, E.M. Smith, for having the courage to allow this information to be posted and discussed.

    Oliver

Comments are closed.