Forget global warming – it's global cooling we should worry about

Global cooling ahead?

For some time now, the indications have been that solar activity and sunspot number are heading towards a minimum in the next few decades. Will it be a Dalton-style or a Maunder-style minimum? If the latter, we should be looking forward to significant cooling.

We reported on a recent press release from the Met Office a few days ago (Solar decline “unlikely to offset greenhouse warming”: Met Office), where the warmist spin was that reductions in solar irradiance were insignificant and would not halt CO2-induced global warming.

And yes, if you put on your AGW-blinkers, forget 90% of the science of solar physics, focus only on solar irradiance and ignore the plethora of indirect effects on the climate which are related to the Sun, that’s probably correct.

But now others are speaking out on this narrow interpretation:

The supposed ‘consensus’ on man-made global warming is facing an inconvenient challenge after the release of new temperature data showing the planet has not warmed for the past 15 years.

The figures suggest that we could even be heading for a mini ice age to rival the 70-year temperature drop that saw frost fairs held on the Thames in the 17th Century.

Based on readings from more than 30,000 measuring stations, the data was issued last week without fanfare by the Met Office and the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit. It confirms that the rising trend in world temperatures ended in 1997.

Notice how the data were released “without fanfare”, and consider how the data would have been released if they showed continued warming [here’s a clue, it would have been shouted from the rooftops]. As usual, inconvenient data is slipped out to avoid anyone noticing.

Meanwhile, leading climate scientists yesterday told The Mail on Sunday that, after emitting unusually high levels of energy throughout the 20th Century, the sun is now heading towards a ‘grand minimum’ in its output, threatening cold summers, bitter winters and a shortening of the season available for growing food.

Because cooling is really bad news compared to a gentle warming. So be careful what you wish for…

Solar output goes through 11-year cycles, with high numbers of sunspots seen at their peak.

We are now at what should be the peak of what scientists call ‘Cycle 24’ – which is why last week’s solar storm resulted in sightings of the aurora borealis further south than usual. But sunspot numbers are running at less than half those seen during cycle peaks in the 20th Century.

Analysis by experts at NASA and the University of Arizona – derived from magnetic-field measurements 120,000 miles beneath the sun’s surface – suggest that Cycle 25, whose peak is due in 2022, will be a great deal weaker still. 

According to a paper issued last week by the Met Office, there is a  92 per cent chance that both Cycle 25 and those taking place in the following decades will be as weak as, or weaker than, the ‘Dalton minimum’ of 1790 to 1830. In this period, named after the meteorologist John Dalton, average temperatures in parts of Europe fell by 2C.

However, it is also possible that the new solar energy slump could be as deep as the ‘Maunder minimum’ (after astronomer Edward Maunder), between 1645 and 1715 in the coldest part of the ‘Little Ice Age’ when, as well as the Thames frost fairs, the canals of Holland froze solid.

Yet, in its paper, the Met Office claimed that the consequences now would be negligible – because the impact of the sun on climate is far less than man-made carbon dioxide. Although the sun’s output is likely to decrease until 2100, ‘This would only cause a reduction in global temperatures of 0.08C.’ Peter Stott, one of the authors, said: ‘Our findings suggest  a reduction of solar activity to levels not seen in hundreds of years would be insufficient to offset the dominant influence of greenhouse gases.’

These findings are fiercely disputed by other solar experts.

‘World temperatures may end up a lot cooler than now for 50 years or more,’ said Henrik Svensmark, director of the Center for Sun-Climate Research at Denmark’s National Space Institute. ‘It will take a long battle to convince some climate scientists that the sun is important. It may well be that the sun is going to demonstrate this on its own, without the need for their help.’

Indeed so. Thanks to the Sun’s likely forthcoming decrease in output, we will have a real-world experiment to observe, which may finally reveal the level of influence our nearest star really has on our climate.

Read the rest here.


  1. I’ve been saying the same thing for years. The stable climate we currently experience is a unique period in Earth’s climate history – its an anomaly – Ice Ages are the norm with wild fluctuations in climate in between.

  2. Pay your carbon tax and shut up its good for you and don’t question the integrity of ALP government. Carbon tax today in Europe $6.20 a ton; Australia $23.00 a ton …… “Come in Spinner”

  3. Lojac Corry via Facebook says:

    I hope that is a joke paul

  4. I’m not even on the global cooling band wagon. Even that’s a scam.

  5. What a classic: “Our findings suggest that a reduction of solar activity to levels not seen in hundreds of years …” “would only cause a reduction in global temperatures of 0.08 °C”

    Yeh right ! Are these guys nuts !?

  6. So they’ll say that it would be warming if it wasn’t cooling. Interesting about those 16 scientists last week – good write up in the Wall St Journal.

  7. I think I’ve lost count of the number of times I have seen posts on various blogs and sites, where people are quite adamant that the sun is completely and totally irrelevant when discussing the earths climate, and that heat from humans and CO2 output is what drives it. (The Drum seems to draw these people to it like moths to a flame)

    People are still almost allowed to believe what they like, but really, such ignorance is astounding to say the least. as well as depressing. If that’s any indication of the quality of science being taught at school in Australia, then I am sure it won’t be long before we are burning scientists at the stake for being sorcerers or witches, while simultaneously demanding that we need to cure cancer, and do other things to improve our quality of life.

  8. Yes, saw that.

  9. Lots of money to be made off the Carbon markets. More to be made from Gov assistance. No joke, go Google, Carbon trading and failed green government assisted startups.� It’s the new scam for banksters… As the 700 trillion dirivitive market is a bit too inflated now. Need more scams, ops schemes!

  10. Somebody better tell the IPCC about the correlation between solar activity and the Earths climate because their 2007 report says,” More research to investigate the effects of solar behaviour on climate is needed before the magnitude of solar effects on climate can be stated with certainty.”

    … And I thought that was basic 6th grade science – silly me!

  11. thingadonta says:

    I think there is a relatively easy way to figure out roughly how much warming c02 causes, by looking at 2 of the 19th-20th century cooling periods-1940-1970, and 1880-1910, in conjunction with the present one from about the year 2000-2005, which will continue to about 2030-2035 (each cycle is 30 years), and to see if there is any difference.

    In the 2 previous cases T dropped the same ~0.3 degrees,when c02 was low. Both of these drops relate to natural cool periods of PDO cycles. We are currently in a another cool cycle, which started in about 2000-2005. So the T should drop ~0.3 degrees naturally until about 2030-2035 from 2000, in the first ten years a little less, as the process speeds up, so we should have dropped about 0.05 degrees already-which we have. This already shows c02 effect is very small.

    This coming cold 2 decades, and following, should ensure the AGW bursts, I suspect.

  12. Paul Thomas Hutchinson iam guessing your a brainwashed lib supporter so let me introduce some light into your life it doesnt matter what side of politics is in power the outcome is the same

  13. QLD Sceptic says:

    So, what I am reading is that man made activity might actually be a good thing! Why do I think this is a conclusion greenies will not accept and one that will not be advertised by anyone? I am also wondering how northern hemisphere will react? Hoping we will be relatively better off in Australia. (Assuming these predictions are relatively accurate).

  14. Any one notice the temperature change after The sun unleashed an X1.8 class flare that began at 1:12 PM ET on January 27, 2012.???

  15. Sabastian says:

    Met Office: Decline in solar output unlikely to offset global warming. 23 January 2012.
    Are you going to believe your frozen backside or our cherry-picked computer models?

    Where I sit right now was under a glacier 20,ooo years ago. I like warmer.

  16. Jack Lamb via Facebook says:

    WHAT! You mean actually use statistics and data that span climatic change rather than weather! How novel! Raymond, the lag time on solar flares and subsequent changes in temperature have never been successfully modelled. We have modelled the solar flares reliably, but have not tied that to any flutuation in temp. Probably a lot of lag, and the complexities of upper atmosphere reciept of the energy to temp differences on the ground are extremely complex and not well understood.

%d bloggers like this: