It is the sun stupid! The sun drive climate.

Some excerpts below. Emphasis added.

Everyone should be worried about global cooling and how everyone is going to eat in the future not global warming.

https://benthamopen.com/FULLTEXT/TOASCJ-11-44

Abstract

The Sun as climate driver is repeatedly discussed in the literature but proofs are often weak. In order to elucidate the solar influence, we have used a large number of temperature proxies worldwide to construct a global temperature mean G7 over the last 2000 years. The Fourier spectrum of G7 shows the strongest components as ~1000-, ~460-, and ~190 - year periods whereas other cycles of the individual proxies are considerably weaker. The G7 temperature extrema coincide with the Roman, medieval, and present optima as well as the well-known minimum of AD 1450 during the Little Ice Age. We have constructed by reverse Fourier transform a representation of G7 using only these three sine functions, which shows a remarkable Pearson correlation of 0.84 with the 31-year running average of G7. The three cycles are also found dominant in the production rates of the solar-induced cosmogenic nuclides 14C and 10Be, most strongly in the ~190 - year period being known as the De Vries/Suess cycle. By wavelet analysis, a new proof has been provided that at least the ~190-year climate cycle has a solar origin.

Sun's Activity and Climate

Table (2) demonstrates that Stei [21] as the record mirroring the Sun's activity shows the same periods of ~1000, ~500, and ~200 years as found for the temperature record G7, suggesting the Sun as the main climate driver. This hypothesis is often emphasized in the literature (see references under “Introduction/Overview”). However, comparable periods alone would not to be sufficient for excluding autogenous climate mechanisms.

To get more insight on a solar link with climate cycles we compared by wavelet analysis the temperatures of Pet [2] with the production rate of the cosmogenic nuclides 14C and 10Be of Stei [21] over 9000 years (see Table 1. and Fig. 2). The upper and middle panel of Fig. (4) show already by eyesight similarities in the power of the ~190 - year period over 9000 years, thus confirming earlier findings of Knudsen et al. [13].

DISCUSSION / CONCLUSION

The Fourier spectrum of a global temperature record G7, composed of high quality temperature proxies worldwide and recent instrumental data demonstrate the dominance of three climate cycles with ~1000 (Eddy cycle), ~460 (not named but frequently reported), and ~190 year periods (De Vries/Suess cycle). These three sines represent the 31-year running mean of G7 with the remarkable Pearson correlation of 0.84 indicating their importance for climate.

G7, and likewise the sine representations have maxima of comparable size at AD 0, 1000, and 2000. We note that the temperature increase of the late 19th and 20th century is represented by the harmonic temperature representation, and thus is of pure multiperiodic nature. It can be expected that the periodicity of G7, lasting 2000 years so far, will persist also for the foreseeable future. It predicts a temperature drop from present to AD 2050, a slight rise from 2050 to 2130, and a further drop from AD 2130 to 2200 (see Fig. 3), upper panel, green and red curves).

As a main result of our study, the construction of a global record G7 from numerous temperature proxies reduces noise and thus allows the isolation of these global cycles. The dominance of the significant frequency components in the G7 spectrum, as opposed to the strength of other components in the spectra of the individual proxy records supports this view.

We provide a new confirmation for the link between solar activity and climate cycles by wavelet analysis showing a remarkably good agreement of the power of the ~190 - year period for temperatures and solar activity over 9000 years (see Fig. 4 lower panel). As (Fig. 2 and Table 2) show, the periods of ~1000 and ~460 years are also apparently common in records of temperatures and cosmogenic nuclides.
 
Last edited:
From paper:

TOASCJ-11-44_F3.jpg


Another excerpt:

DISCUSSION / CONCLUSION


G7, and likewise the sine representations have maxima of comparable size at AD 0, 1000, and 2000. We note that the temperature increase of the late 19th and 20th century is represented by the harmonic temperature representation, and thus is of pure multiperiodic nature. It can be expected that the periodicity of G7, lasting 2000 years so far, will persist also for the foreseeable future. It predicts a temperature drop from present to AD 2050, a slight rise from 2050 to 2130, and a further drop from AD 2130 to 2200 (see Fig. 3), upper panel, green and red curves).
 
The chart shows that in the last 50 years the solar flux reduced and earths temperature raising, nice way to debunk your own article title.

LOL
 
The chart shows that in the last 50 years the solar flux reduced and earths temperature raising, nice way to debunk your own article title.

LOL
"which shows a remarkable Pearson correlation of 0.84 with the 31-year running average of G7."

It would be completely idiotic not to consider a lag and to think that it would be instantaneous.
 
"which shows a remarkable Pearson correlation of 0.84 with the 31-year running average of G7."

It would be completely idiotic not to consider a lag and to think that it would be instantaneous.

Half a century is one hell of a lag.
 
Half a century is one hell of a lag.
From paper:

Concerning statistical correlation, Bond et al. [8] found an apparently solar-related 1500 year cycle. Liu et al. [9] found cycles of 1324, 800, 199, 110 years from tree rings in the Tibetan plateau. Kern et al. [10] reported on a late Miocene lake system indicating periods of 80, 120, 208, 500, 1000, and 1500 years. Zhao and Feng [11] found periods of 208, 521, and ~1000 years from Antarctic ice cores. Knudsen et al. [12, 13] observed correlation of the ~200 year De Vries/Suess cycle in spectrograms of solar activity with that of temperature variations in caves of China, Turkey, and the USA. Steinhilber and Beer [14] have investigated the solar activity of the last 10,000 years, finding strong indications of the De Vries/Suess cycle, and have predicted on these grounds a future temperature scenario. Babich et al. [15] have found periods of ~1000, ~500 to ~350, and ~200 years in paleoreconstruction of the last 2000 years, predicting a strongly pronounced cooling until AD 2500. In this context, we need to mention Schlesinger and Ramankutty [16], Gervais [17], De Vries [18], Suess [19], Steinhilber et al. [20, 21], Breitenmoser et al. [22], Cliver et al. [23], Raspopov et al. [24], Novello et al. [25], Wagner et al. [26], Lüdecke et al. [27, 28], Friis-Christensen and Lassen [29], Van Geel et al. [30], Braun et al. [31], Lohmann and Schöne [32], Czymzik et al. [33], Adolphi et al. [34], Wirth et al. [35], Lockwood [36], Fleitmann et al. [37], Svensmark [38], Svensmark et al. [6], Marsh and Svensmark [39], Enghoff [40], Gray et al. [41], Haigh [42, 43], Ineson et al. [44], Seidenglanz et al. [45], Kodera [46], Meehl et al. [47], and Leal-Silva and Herrera [48]. Lüning [49] provides an extensive compilation of pertinent references.
 
Half a century is one hell of a lag.
Fig. (3)(Color online) Upper panel: Global record G7 (grey), running 31-year average of G7 (blue), sine representation of G7 with three sine functions of the periods 1003, 463, and 188 years (green), with four sine functions including the period ~60 years (red), continued to AD 2200. The parameters of the sine functions are given in Table 3. The Pearson correlation between the 31 year running average of G7 and the three-sine representation (green) is 0.84, for the four-sine representation (red) 0.85. Lower panel: G7 (grey) together with the sine functions of 1003, 463, and 188 - year periods continued until AD 2200 (equal sine amplitudes for clarity).
 
And? It performs a FTT and then reconstructs from that. Of course it would match, it would be a big surprise if it didn't. The problem is that the deviation since greenhouse gases took off in the last 50 years, you will have to wait another 50 years to see if the lag catches up, that's not a smart risk to take based on a paper that doesn't even mention greenhouse gases.
 
And? It performs a FTT and then reconstructs from that. Of course it would match, it would be a big surprise if it didn't. The problem is that the deviation since greenhouse gases took off in the last 50 years, you will have to wait another 50 years to see if the lag catches up, that's not a smart risk to take based on a paper that doesn't even mention greenhouse gases.
Well, here is another model that you can review with the excel.

You can read all about it here: http://sciencespeak.com/climate-nd-solar.html

The model, data, code and calculations are here: Climate.xlsm (20Mb).

total-solar-irradiance-1.1.gif


evans-solar-model-prediction-fig2.1.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: jem
why? all the studies that have been published show co2 levels trail changes in ocean temps and changes in air temps.

there is no science showing man made co2 creates warming.

is it so hard to understand the ocean warms and then the atmosphere can hold more co2 and then when the oceans cool it can hold less. sort of like water vapor.

is it not possible possible that water vapor and clouds are tied to the sun and that clouds and water vapor influence temperature far more than co2

there is tons of peer reviewed science showing that temperature is tied to changes in the sun and changes in the tides and the oceans....

there is no science showing man made co2 creates warming. maybe someday there will be.

And? It performs a FTT and then reconstructs from that. Of course it would match, it would be a big surprise if it didn't. The problem is that the deviation since greenhouse gases took off in the last 50 years, you will have to wait another 50 years to see if the lag catches up, that's not a smart risk to take based on a paper that doesn't even mention greenhouse gases.
 
Back
Top