Baltimore, MD – In a story I released last month I reported that the Solar Cycle 24 will go down in the books as one of the quietest solar cycles in almost 100 years– if not longer.
The New York Times released an article called ‘The Sun That Did Not Roar,’ which talked about this 11-year cycle and how unique it has been. The article states that the sun was spotless on 266 days which was the blankest in half a century.
Solar Cycle 24 was expected to reach its peak intensity over the next couple of months and an indication of that came with the sun flipping its north and south poles. However, a second active phase never picked up. Scientists believe its possible cycle 24 reached peak intensity over a year ago marking this maximum as one of the weakest in history.
Possible explanations for the sun’s latest odd behavior were discussed last month at a meeting of the Astronomical Society’s Solar Physics Division. Scientists agree that Cycle 24 is already among the weakest reported and it has not finished its full cycle.
Dr Matthew Penn from the National Solar Observatory says the sunspot cycle may disappear altogether in the next 10 years.
What does this mean for winter?
Studies by several scientists show low solar activity can actually be linked to harsh winter in the United States and northern Europe.
Studies find temperature and pressure patterns associated with low solar activity resemble the negative phases of NAO or North Atlantic Oscillation which can bring brutal cold air from northern Canada into the United States.
A survey done by NASA in 2001 found that during the 17 th century also known as the “ Maunder Minimum” brutal cold air was found from the Northeastern USA into Europe.
Other research finds a weaker polar vortex can be found displaced from pushed further south near the United States bordering bringing cold air into the eastern United States and Europe.
- Private disaster service companies see climate change as an emerging market, a big business, not in developing alternative energy, sustainable energy, but just in servicing this increasingly volatile, dangerous warming world. “Shock Doctrine” Author Naomi Klein on State-Sanctioned Torture and Disaster Response for the Chosen
- Print news media have warned of four separate climate changes in slightly more than 100 years – global cooling, warming, cooling again, and, perhaps not so finally, warming.Some current warming stories combine the concepts and claim the next ice age will be triggered by rising temperatures .Recent global warming reports have continued that trend, morphing into a hybrid of both theories. News media that once touted the threat of “global warming” have moved on to the more flexible term “climate change.”The effect of the idea of “climate change” means that any major climate event can be blamed on global warming, supposedly driven by mankind. Conflicting Views on Climate Change: Fire and Ice by R. Warren Anderson and Dan Gainor
- In November of 2009, the Climategate scandal broke, in which thousands of emails written by scientists at the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) were leaked and revealed a concocted effort to skew the data and prevent dissenting views from getting into peer reviewed academic journals. In short, it was institutionalized intellectual dishonesty. The academics involved in the scandal were “the small group of scientists who have for years been more influential in driving the worldwide alarm over global warming than any others, not least through the role they play at the heart of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)” Climate Change: Concocting the “Consensus” by Andrew Gavin Marshall
- Increase of carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere is not the cause of global warming which has a solar origin …There exists no reliable scientific evidence that anthropogenic increase of the carbon dioxide concentration has caused current global warming or can lead to catastrophic changes of the Earth climate in the visible future…anthropogenic global warming is a Great Myth. Habibullo I. Abdussamatov , Head of the Space Research Laboratory of the Russian Academies of Sciences’ Pulkovo Observatory and of the International Space Station’s Russian-Ukrainian Astrometria project
- Creating an ideology pegged to carbon dioxide is a dangerous nonsense. The present alarm on climate change is an instrument of social control, a pretext for major businesses and political battle. Delgado Domingo, Environmental Scientist, Portugal, the founder of the Numerical Weather Forecast group
- I had the privilege of being fired by Al Gore, since I refused to go along with his alarmism… I have spent a long research career studying physics that is closely related to the greenhouse effect… Fears about man-made global warming are unwarranted and are not based on good science. The earth’s climate is changing now, as it always has. There is no evidence that the changes differ in any qualitative way from those of the past. Will Harper, Princeton University physicist, former Director of Energy Research at the Department of Energy
- When it comes to future climate, no one knows what they’re talking about. No one. Not the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) nor its scientists, not the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, not the NRDC or National Geographic, not the U.S. congressional House leadership, not me, not you, and certainly not Mr. Albert Gore. Patrick Frank, chemist
- The only people who would be hurt by abandoning the Kyoto Protocol [on Climate Change] would be several thousand people who make a living attending conferences on global warming. Kirill Kondratyev, scientist, Russian Academy of Sciences
- The IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) is pre-programmed to produce reports to support the hypotheses of anthropogenic warming and the control of greenhouse gases, as envisioned in the Global Climate Treaty… The 1990 IPCC Summary completely ignored satellite data, since they showed no warming. The 1995 IPCC report was notorious for the significant alterations made to the text after it was approved by the scientists – in order to convey the impression of a human influence. The 2001 IPCC report claimed the twentieth century showed ‘unusual warming’ based on the now-discredited hockey stick graph. The latest IPCC report, published in 2007, completely devaluates the climate contributions from changes in solar activities, which are likely to dominate any human influence Frederick Seitz, Past President, U.S. National Academy of Sciences
- Research data on climate change do not show that human use of hydrocarbons is harmful. To the contrary, there is good evidence that increased atmospheric carbon dioxide is environmentally helpful… Agreement [Kyoto Treaty on Climate Change] would have very negative effects upon the technology of nations throughout the world, especially those that are currently attempting to lift from poverty and provide opportunities to the over 4 billion people in technologically underdeveloped countries. Frederick Seitz, Past President, U.S. National Academy of Sciences
- The IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] ‘Summary for Policymakers’ might get a few readers, but the main purpose of the report is to provide a spurious scientific backup for the absurd claims of the worldwide environmentalist lobby that it has been established scientifically that increases in carbon dioxide are harmful to the climate. It just does not matter that this ain’t so. Vincent Gray, climate scientist, expert reviewer on every draft of the IPCC report
- The IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Cllimate Change) climate change documents do not provide an objective assessment of the earth’s temperature trends and associated climate change.
… An increasing number of scientists are now questioning the hypothesis of Greenhouse gas induced warming of the earth’s surface and suggesting a stronger impact of solar variability and large-scale atmospheric circulation patterns on the observed temperature increase than previously believed. Madhav L. Khandekar, UN scientist and retired Environment Canada scientist
- Dire predictions of catastrophe from … the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, are based solely on computer models that amount to poorly crafted mathematical opinions, not experimental proof… There is no proof that man-made carbon dioxide causes additional warming, or that carbon-dioxide reduction would reduce warming. Claude Culross, organic chemist
- Creating an ideology pegged to carbon dioxide is a dangerous nonsense. The present alarm on climate change is an instrument of social control, a pretext for major businesses and political battle. It became an ideology. Delgado Domingos, environmental scientist
- What I’d do with the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) report is to put it in the trash can because that’s all it’s worth….carbon dioxide was an insignificant component of the earth’s atmosphere and that, rather than being the purveyor of doom it is currently viewed as today, it is needed in order for plants to grow. Dennis Hollars, astrophysicist
- I was convinced, as were most technically trained people, that the IPCC’s (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) case for Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) is very tight. However, upon taking the time to get into the details of the science, I was appalled at how flimsy the case really is… I was also appalled at the behavior of many of those who helped produce the IPCC reports and by many of those who promote it. In particular I am referring to the arrogance; the activities aimed at shutting down debate; the outright fabrications; the mindless defense of bogus science, and the politicization of the IPCC process and the science process itself. Roger W. Cohen, physicist
- As the glaciological and tree ring evidence shows, climate change is a natural phenomenon that has occurred many times in the past, both with the magnitude as well as with the time rate of the temperature change that have occurred in the recent decades. Gerhard Lobert, physicist
- For most of earth’s history carbon dioxide level has been several times higher than the present….The conclusion from all this is that carbon dioxide change does not cause significant climate change. Actions to control the amount of non-condensing greenhouse gases that are added to the atmosphere are based on the mistaken assumption that global warming was caused by human activity. Dan Pangburn, mechanical engineer, author of a climate research paper
- he 20th Century increased the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere continuously. Man-made CO2 grew exponentially; however, global temperatures fell between 1940 and 1975, during the time span as the global industrial production almost exploded… The entire atmospheric carbon dioxide, of which man-made CO2 is only a fraction, is not to blame for global warming… Carbon dioxide is not responsible for the warming of the global climate over the last 150 years… More than 90 percent are changes in the Earth-Sun relationship to climate fluctuations… the sun’s activities themselves, such as the recently discovered 22-year cycles and sunspots. Klaus P. Heiss, space engineer, NASA
- As the climate change debate moves from the scientific to the political, it is important to stay with the facts. The bottom line is that humans cannot prevent global warming… We should not be carried away by misconceptions about what is driving climate change. It’s with the Earth itself. W.J. “Bill” Collins, professor, School of Earth and Environmental Sciences-James Cook University, Australia
- Climate change has become a convenient excuse when there are other environmental issues that need to be addressed… If we disproportionately blame ourselves for climate change, our response will be different… We should look at the bigger picture and address other issues… There are serious environment problems that need to be addressed in order to effectively deal with climate change… The issues are: the destruction and conversion of forest, ocean, fresh water systems and other natural habitats; overharvesting of wild foods; the loss of biodiversity; excess fossil fuel extraction; soil erosion and swelling human population. Perry Ong, director of the Institute of Biology at the UP College of Science, Phillipines
- Earth has cooled since 1998 in defiance of the predictions by the UN-IPCC.The global temperature for 2007 was the coldest in a decade and the coldest of the millennium, which is why ‘global warming’ is now called ‘climate change. Richard Keen, climatologist, Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences University of Colorado
- I am afraid that I do not hold with the theory of ‘global warming’ – there will always be climate change….Big thing here is – do we know what we are doing that is bringing about climate change? At present the answer to this is NO. Kevin Warwick, professor of cybernetics-University of Reading, England, research in artificial intelligence, control, robotics
- Around the world, as controversy over climate change continues to grow, it remains very clear that contrary to what the politicians tell us, not only is there is no consensus of scientific thought on this matter, but the science is certainly not settled. In fact, in a bizarre twist of fate, at a time when advocates of man-made global warming continue to push government policies to restrict energy use and the burning of fossil fuels in order to prevent ‘catastrophic’ warming, the world continues to cool….That is leading to increasing scepticism that the call to sacrifice living standards in order to “save the planet” is just political spin designed to persuade the public to accept green taxes. Muriel Newman, mathematician, a member of the Northland Conservation Board
- It would be recognized that the IPCC is just another review, and an unstructured and biased one at that. Its main in-scope goal is to find a human influence on climate, and the range of reasons for climate change are out-of-scope, creating a systematic bias against natural explanations for climate change. David Stockwell, ecological modeler, published research articles on climate change, authored book about “niche modeling”
- In an echo of earlier times, the climate change prophets have in recent years tried to silence counter views and suppress dissent. August members of the Royal Society, a body once noted for its cultivation of debate in science, are now leaders of the ‘science is settled’ camp: the only debate they consider to be legitimate is about choice among the different forms of the centralized action they believe is required to deal with the problems they foresee. Colin Robinson, founder of the Department of Economics- University of Surrey UK, Fellow of the Royal Statistical Society
- The public has been repeatedly misled that there is a scientific consensus on global warming. Totally false. Unfortunately, man-made climate change, or anthropogenic global warming as it’s more commonly known, has become a political issue rather than a scientific one. Glenn Speck, chemist, Isotek Environmental Lab, 35 years testing air, water, fuel, and soil for chemicals, including CO2
- As a stratigrapher/paleogeographer, I have been aware throughout my career of the wide variations in the climate of Earth as recorded in the rocks. Climate change is the norm for the planet….I am unaware of any CO2 research that demonstrates a temperature anomaly that corresponds to CO2 flux in the atmosphere. On the contrary, everything I read from the refereed side of science shows CO2 to trail warming. Francis T. Manns, geologist, manages Artesian Geological Research
- Instead of credit derivatives or oil futures or mortgage-backed CDOs, the new game in town, the next bubble, is in carbon credits — a booming trillion- dollar market that barely even exists yet, but will if the Democratic Party that [Goldman-Sachs] gave $4,452,585 to in the last election manages to push into existence a groundbreaking new commodities bubble, disguised as an “environmental plan,” called cap-and-trade. The new carbon-credit market is a virtual repeat of the commodities-market casino that’s been kind to Goldman, except it has one delicious new wrinkle: If the plan goes forward as expected, the rise in prices will be government-mandated. Goldman won’t even have to rig the game. It will be rigged in advance. The Great American Bubble Machine Matt Taibbi on how Goldman Sachs has engineered every major market manipulation since the Great Depression by Matt Tiabbi
- When it comes to science, never blindly accept an explanation from a politician or scientists who have turned political for their own private gain. Taxing carbon will have absolutely no beneficial effect on our climate, will hurt the economies of the world, and will be harmful to the production of food because less carbon dioxide means reduced plant growth. Bob Ashworth, chemical engineer, American Geophysical Union, authored a 2008 technical analysis of global warming
- My opinion is that there is absolutely no proof that carbon dioxide is anything to do with any impending catastrophe. The science has, quite simply, gone awry. In fact, it’s not even science any more, it’s anti-science. Professor David Bellamy
- Carbon dioxide is not even a little bit bad. It is wholly beneficial…There are no deleterious consequences of higher atmospheric carbon dioxide levels. Higher atmospheric carbon dioxide levels are wholly beneficial. Dr. David Archibald
- Compared to solar magnetic fields, however, the carbon dioxide production has as much influence on climate as a flea has on the weight of an elephant. Dr. Oliver K Manuel, University of Missouri