Rick Salvador’s 2013 Pattern Recognition in Physics solar prediction now validated

Tallbloke's Talkshop

Our hypothesis that solar variation is affected by planetary motion, developed over the last 10 years here at the talkshop received a boost today when one of its main detractors, Anthony Watts, published an article declaring that solar cycle 24 is entering minimum.

I’ve left a comment there, something I rarely do since the debacle back in 2014 when Anthony and his sidekick Willis attacked our work and banned discussion of our solar-planetary theory. I’ll be interested to see if it passes moderation.

salvador-validation

Here’s the plot I linked. It shows that Rick Salvador’s model is spot on track over the last 5 years.

View original post 55 more words

Advertisements

Are we headed for a deep solar minimum?

Watts Up With That?

Have you been keeping an eye on Sol lately? One of the top astronomy stories for 2018 may be what’s not happening, and how inactive our host star has become.

The strange tale of Solar Cycle #24 is ending with an expected whimper: as of May 8th, the Earthward face of the Sun had been spotless for 73 out of 128 days thus far for 2018, or more than 57% of the time. This wasn’t entirely unexpected, as the solar minimum between solar cycle #23 and #24 saw 260 spotless days in 2009 – the most recorded in a single year since 1913.

Cycle #24 got off to a late and sputtering start, and though it produced some whopper sunspots reminiscent of the Sol we knew and loved on 20th century cycles past, it was a chronic under-performer overall. Mid-2018 may see the end of cycle #24 and the…

View original post 504 more words

Woods Hole Climatologist Gives False Evidence To Congress

NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood

Science Magazine had fun taking the mickey out of this GOP Rep, but failed to uncover some seriously erroneous statements by a supposed “climate scientist” at the U.S. House of Representatives Science, Space and Technology Committee earlier this week.

This is their account (my bold):

image

The Earth is not warming. The White Cliffs of Dover are tumbling into the sea and causing sea levels to rise. Global warming is helping grow the Antarctic ice sheet.

Those are some of the skeptical assertions echoed by Republicans on the U.S. House of Representatives Science, Space and Technology Committee yesterday. The lawmakers at times embraced research that questions mainstream climate science during a hearing on how technology can be used to address global warming.

A leading climate scientist testifying before the panel spent much of the two hours correcting misstatements.

The purpose of the hearing was to focus on how…

View original post 1,837 more words

Woods Hole Research Center

I tried to listen to his testimony, and couldn’t make it more than five minutes.

NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood

Philip B. Duffy

Philip B. Duffy, Ph.D.

President and Executive Director

Woods Hole Research Center

Yesterday I mentioned the testimony of Philip Duffy to the U.S. House of Representatives Science, Space and Technology Committee, which included three seriously misleading statements.

It is important to draw a distinction between Woods Hole Research Center and the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, both based in Massachusetts.

The latter is a genuine scientific organisation, which specialises in ocean studies.

image

https://www.whoi.edu/

By contrast, Duffy’s Woods Hole Research Center is no more than a climate change think tank.

image

http://whrc.org/

It receives most of its funding from the US Government, and Duffy himself has spent much of his career working for the White House. Below is his profile from Woods Hole:

The idea that either Woods Hole Research Center or Duffy himself are objective scientific advisors is laughable.

View original post

IUCN polar bear specialists reject IPCC- supported forecasts of sea ice based on CO2

polarbearscience

In case you missed it — or missed the significance of it — polar bear specialist Mitch Taylor correctly pointed out in his recent essay (a response to the New York Timesarticle that appeared Tuesday (10 April) about the Harvey et al. (2018) BioScience paper) that the IUCN Polar Bear Specialist Group have given up using computer models of future sea ice extent based on rising CO2 levels supported by the IPCC.

Polar_Bear_male_Regehr photo_March 21 2010_labeled

Their latest assessment (Regehr et al. 2016) does not link polar bear survival models to climate modeled forecasts of Arctic sea ice decline but rather to an assumption that declines already documented will continue in linear fashion over this century.

This means that CO2 emissions blamed on human fossil fuel use is no longer directly tied to the predicted future decline of polar bear numbers: IUCN polar bear specialists simply assume that sea ice will…

View original post 1,046 more words

Tracking polar bears in the Beaufort Sea resumes after a one year hiatus

polarbearscience

Fourteen bears tagged by the US Geological Survey (USGS) on or near the central Southern Beaufort Sea coast in April 2018 (near Kaktovik) will be tracked online over the coming months.

The break in published USGS tagging data from March 2017 to April 2018 was the first since the project began in December 2009 but no explanation for the hiatus has been provided. It is therefore unclear whether no tagging occurred in spring 2017 or data was simply not published online. The last bears followed were tagged in March 2016.

Tranquilized_pb570_S Beaufort March 2014_USGS

In contrast to previous years, this spring all fourteen of the bears have glue-on ear transmitters, which means they are either adult males or juvenile bears rather than females (which are fitted with satellite collars):

“In collaboration with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service we are also experimenting with glue-on and ear tag satellite transmitters, which can be…

View original post 516 more words

Possible origin of Dansgaard-Oeschger abrupt climate events

Tallbloke's Talkshop

Vertical line shows planetary conjunction with the Sun [credit: Wikipedia]
Numerous studies have found evidence of an apparently regular and significant climate event every 1,470 years (on average), which seems to show up most clearly in glacial periods. They speak of a ‘robust 1,470-year response time’, ‘a precise clock’, ‘abrupt climate change’ and so forth.

However they also say things like: ‘The origin of this regular pacing…remains a mystery.’

A couple of example studies here:
Possible solar origin of the 1,470-year glacial climate cycle demonstrated in a coupled model (2005)

Timing of abrupt climate change: A precise clock (2003)
– – –
Now we can relate this to the half period of the Jupiter-Saturn (J-S) conjunction cycle, i.e. one inferior or superior conjunction, as explained at Wikipedia.

The average J-S half-period is 9.932518 years.
The nearest harmonic to that period in Earth years is 10.
1470 = 148 *…

View original post 125 more words