If you thought it was already oddly cold with bad weather, per Dr. Valentina Zharkova, the Grand Solar Minimum funk isn’t even at full press yet… We’ve got between one and 5 years of it to get really bad…
This is a link to one of her papers. On page 26 is the graph of solar cycles:
And a long but information filled video where she talks about having predicted the two magnetic field solar model prior to it being found with instrumentation. So lending some credence to her work. Their is also shown a 350 to 400 year cycle of the envelope of Solar Cycles. This lands right on the timing that was a “1/4 Bond Cycle” that I had postulated seemed to show up in human history. On a 1400 ish year cycle there are major collapses, then at 700 years some minor collapses, and I’d speculated things looked like there were hard times about every 1/2 of that, or 350 years.
The audio is poor during the introduction, then improves and the slides are directly embedded into the video. Long, and between her accent and high pitch, a bit hard to follow, but I think she’s nailed it. To the extent she has, this lets us map the climate changes of past history (so see their impacts on history) as well as plan for the future in a proper way.
Since the changes in solar output look like they move the rain bands, that would favor some areas for a long time, then have catastrophic crop failures when the rains moved away (and flooded somewhere else…) Rather like we are seeing now in Indonesia (rice crop not doing well) and Australia. AND, her work shows this is just the lead in to the Grand Solar Minimum effects.
Then you have about 22 to 25 years of it until you are into the next solar cycles of the recovery to warmth.
Have you watched any of the SuspiciousObserver vids?
@Marcus: I’ve seen one or two, but not much. They only showed up in my Youtube recommended list a few weeks ago, and not often.
If it gets too chilly we can always nuke Panama.
That should warm things up a bit and the cargo shippers wouldn’t complain. Of course the Panamanians may have a few objections.
Someone had asked, in another thread “somewhere”, what the time lag was between minimum and weather response. I think history can give clue:
Shows the bottom of the Dalton was about 1820. Then, in 1846, The Dommer Party was hit with exceptional snow in the Sierra Nevada. So that’s about 25 years offset +/- 5 or so.
What prompted this? The weather report saying several FEET of snow in the Sierra Nevada from this one storm and it isn’t even winter yet. Then we’ve had about 10 to 15 years of low sunspots and the weather has turned… Plus the peak was about 20 years back and declining since.
So as a guess, it looks like 15 years to 20 years for onset of change, fully manifest about 25 to 30 years.
IMHO, more matching of sunspot profile to historical records could refine that estimate and incorporate regional variations ( like the impact / change of Pacific temperatures showing first at the equator then moving in bands up to the North Pole; or Northern Hemisphere flooding with Australuan droughts).
Particularly useful might be Be isotope in ice vs ancient empire collapses with an offset.
The other way to calibrate the delay would be to correlate the sunspot information (ie Be10 and other references) to the O18 ice core implied temperature information.
Click to access 26-Thorsteinsson-isotopeclimate.pdf
This chart from the above link showing O18 concentrations implies to me that the little ice age was actually a series of closely spaced cooling events not a general cooling.
Oxygen Isotope Record
Measurement of the ratio of O18 vs. O16 isotopes in ice indicates the temperature of the snow at the time it was formed. Higher ratios of the heavier O18 oxygen isotope indicate the snow formed at a higher temperature while lower ratios indicate the snow formed at a cooler temperature. Therefore, a graph of this ratio vs. time can illustrate the temperature record. Fig. 2 shows the ratio of O18 vs. O16 from an ice core taken from northwest Greenland.
Using a Mark I eyeball integrator, it looks to me that you had sharp cooling episodes in about
1190, 1300, 1430, 1530, 1680, (perhaps 2 episodes merged, one at 1600 and the second at 1630 or so) a small dip in 1740, and a very sharp dip in 1820
Something kept happening to push down the temperatures every
110, 130, 100, 150, 60, 80 years or an average period of about every 105 years +/- 30
Vulcanism or every five 22 year solar cycles?
Significant erruptions that are near the time of peak cooling
VEI 7 Mt. Tambora = 1815
VEI 6 Long Island volcano Papua New Guinea = 1660 eruption comparable to Mt. Pinatubo 1991
VEI 6 Kolumbo volcano, Santorini = 1650 (9/27)
VEI 6 Mount Melibengoy Mindanao island in the Philippines January 4, 1641.
There does not seem to be a really good time match for major eruptions and the 1430 or 1530 dips
Record cold in San Francisco
The high temperature in the city on Thursday was forty-eight degrees. That tied a record high temperature for the coldest date for San Francisco in the month of November. That record had stood unchallenged ,b>since November 27th, 1896, when it last happened.
Yeah, I’m living that SF Bay area dream…. BRRRrrrr….
That isotope ratio idea is golden.
Interesting plot and concept for measuring small long term changes in climate.
The extremes are too infrequent to give good statistical indictations, but here you have a plot of the variation of hundreds of days data so it should be relatively insensitive to isolated extreme events shifting the plot. (also note how noisy the data is even with that larger universe of data.)
It appears to me there is a subtle sinusoidal cycle in the data, would be interesting to see the best fit curve rather than straight line trend.