Solar Irradiance in a nose-dive...

[mamooth]

Pitiful pickin's there. Especially the part where the IPCC always TOSSES the baseline completely OUT and just hoists the cyclical portion of "solar activity" as an "IPCC definition of solar forcing. It's always been contrived and deceptive..

http://www.climatechange2013.org/images/uploads/WGIAR5_WGI-12Doc2b_FinalDraft_Chapter08.pdf

Figure 8-10 in AR5 shows the baseline of ~1361 very clearly. So what is the problem you're having. Do you think the graph scale should run from 0-1363, so that the signal is almost completely invisible?

So -- no more expectations that the temperature result has to look EXACTLY LIKE the forcing mechanism???

Why do you think the result has to look like the forcing mechanism? I certainly never said it should, so that has to be your idea. I just point out that an accelerating output after a step function doesn't match how any real world system behaves. Output is supposed to initially jump up then gradually level off to a new equilibrium, not keep accelerating.

Wow man -- you're making great retarded progress.. Now that learned a little systems theory lingo -- we should clear up your misuses and poor understanding of "spectrum".. Maybe a little Fourier synthesis would help eh?

If you want to be taken seriously, you have to do something besides the endless handwaving. Do some actual science. Tell everyone what this solar-based system is. Quantify it. Show it hindcasts correctly. Make predictions with it, and have those predictions come true. You know, do like the climate scientists have done so successfully, hence the reason they have so much credibility. You don't get credibility just by complaining.

 

[MaryL]

Just when you thought it couldn't get stranger, Solar Irradiance has dropped to 1360.0 W/m^2. a full drop of 1.4 W/m^2 in just three days.

Confirmed with the SOURCE project that it is not a sensor malfunction and that it is a massive drop that is continuing to drop. The drop in TSI is substantial when you consider that just a 1.5W/m^2 will result in a 2 to 4 deg C drop on earth in rather short order.. They are hopeful that this is a short term drop and when the sun spots return to the face so will TSI.

These types of drops have been very rarely recorded with major sun spots and if they persist long enough it could result in an ice age.

This drop is different than previous ones, which were much smaller and were very short in duration...

Going to be watching this one with great interest... How low will it go and for how long..??

Polar icecaps are melting, sea levels are rising. I have to pay more to water my grass, I pay more for electricity because of the high demand of air conditioning? It's a liberal plot? Right.

 

[Old Rocks]

I agree... The AGW faithful are going to be sorely disappointed as this recent loss of heat will be felt in coming weeks and months. The northern hemisphere above 9,000 feet has cooled about 1.5 deg C in the last two weeks....

Poor Billy, so ignorant of the basic physics, and so innumerate.

That graph? It's not a measurement of actual TSI at earth. It's a sort of normalized TSI, what TSI at earth would be if the earth had a circular orbit.

However, earth doesn't have a circular orbit. That's why TSI at the actual position of the earth varies by about 80W/m^2 between aphelion and perihelion.

Billy claims a one-week blip of 1 will nosedive temps. Yet we observe that a regular loss of 0-40 for a whole season doesn't freeze the earth.

Why? Because the earth's climate shows almost no response to TSI changes over spans of days or months. It takes years for any TSI effects to accumulate in the climate. To put it in systems terms, the earth's climate is a low-pass filter.

Oh that's rich.. The climate "is a low-pass filter" to ANYTHING EXCEPT CO2... In that case -- the forcing that Matthew sees TODAY will be headlines tomorrow..

And the SORCE/TIM graph reconstructions are NOT "normalized TSI".. They are EMPIRICAL (measurement or proxy) data set.. And a Solar Minimum is about a 40 year event at the least. Possibly more. WTF do you get this "one week blip"?

I've explained to Billy that this is expected variance in TSI at this point in ANY solar cycle. And that the "cooling event" would be signaled thru the more direct parameters measuring solar "activity" and not the "total solar output":.

Only SquidWard and the entire IPCC is confused between "solar activity" indicators showing CYCLICAL activity and TSI which has the cyclical activity sitting on top of an "UN-NORMALIZED" baseline. It's that BASELINE that determines climate warming/cooling.. NOT the "cyclical" indications..

CO2 is also a low pass filter. That is why we are seeing a gradual warmup, rather than a sudden one in response to the amount of GHGs we have put into the atmosphere. What we are seeing right now is response to the GHG levels of 30 or more years ago. When the GHG levels were at the same amounts, things were quite differant in a lot of places.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/a...n-pliocene-last-time-co2-levels-above-400ppm/

Scientists trying to determine how the Earth might change as temperatures rise often look back in time to a period around 3.6 million years ago called the middle Pliocene, when concentrations of carbon dioxide ranged from about 380 to 450 parts per million. (Today they are nearing 400.)

A study published yesterday in the journal Science analyzed the longest land-based sediment core ever taken in the Arctic and found that during this period, from 3.6 million to 2.2 million years ago, the area around the North Pole was much warmer and wetter than it is now.

In the middle Pliocene, summer temperatures in the Arctic were around 60 degrees Fahrenheit, which is about 14 degrees warmer than they are now, the study found.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Just when you thought it couldn't get stranger, Solar Irradiance has dropped to 1360.0 W/m^2. a full drop of 1.4 W/m^2 in just three days.

Confirmed with the SOURCE project that it is not a sensor malfunction and that it is a massive drop that is continuing to drop. The drop in TSI is substantial when you consider that just a 1.5W/m^2 will result in a 2 to 4 deg C drop on earth in rather short order.. They are hopeful that this is a short term drop and when the sun spots return to the face so will TSI.

These types of drops have been very rarely recorded with major sun spots and if they persist long enough it could result in an ice age.

This drop is different than previous ones, which were much smaller and were very short in duration...

Going to be watching this one with great interest... How low will it go and for how long..??

Polar icecaps are melting, sea levels are rising. I have to pay more to water my grass, I pay more for electricity because of the high demand of air conditioning? It's a liberal plot? Right.

I pay more for electricity because of the high demand of air conditioning?

More likely your higher rates are due to "green" mandates.
Gotta pay for that unreliable wind and solar power, doncha know.

 

[Old Rocks]

Just when you thought it couldn't get stranger, Solar Irradiance has dropped to 1360.0 W/m^2. a full drop of 1.4 W/m^2 in just three days.

Confirmed with the SOURCE project that it is not a sensor malfunction and that it is a massive drop that is continuing to drop. The drop in TSI is substantial when you consider that just a 1.5W/m^2 will result in a 2 to 4 deg C drop on earth in rather short order.. They are hopeful that this is a short term drop and when the sun spots return to the face so will TSI.

These types of drops have been very rarely recorded with major sun spots and if they persist long enough it could result in an ice age.

This drop is different than previous ones, which were much smaller and were very short in duration...

Going to be watching this one with great interest... How low will it go and for how long..??

Polar icecaps are melting, sea levels are rising. I have to pay more to water my grass, I pay more for electricity because of the high demand of air conditioning? It's a liberal plot? Right.

In the Pacific Northwest, we have a considerable number of glaciers. In fact, the state of Washington has more glaciers than the other lower 48 put together. And we are seeing dramatic losses of glacial runoff, and it will have an negative affect for the communities dependent on that water in the future.

Shrinking glaciers: Geologist studies Washington state’s retreating glaciers

The shrinking of glaciers in the Pacific Northwest is reducing the summer water supply in regional watersheds, according to a geologist for the National Park Service.

Jon Riedel, a researcher with North Cascades National Park, delivered the alarming news at the Columbia Forum, held Tuesday evening at the Columbia Memorial Hospital Community Center.

Using data from his glacier-monitoring studies and the work of other scientists, Riedel discussed how higher global temperatures impact glaciers in Washington state’s national parks and what it means for the wider ecology.

So what happens when a watershed loses its glaciers? Riedel pointed to the Skagit watershed, the largest valley draining into the Puget Sound, as a case study.

In 1959, the summer glacial runoff in the Skagit Basin provided about 171 billion gallons of cold freshwater to the Skagit River and surrounding waterways. By 2013, the amount was 129 billion — a 24 percent decrease. The loss equals about a 100-year supply of water at the current annual use rate in Skagit County.

“That is a pretty dramatic amount of loss,” Riedel said.

 

[MaryL]

People's incredulity aside, I pay more to water my lawn or for air conditioning in the summer. Less in the winter for heating costs. Oh, yeah, now we get these massive rain/hail and tornados now. Yuck that up, it adds to our insurance rates overall. Funny, hardy har har. I am not laughing.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

People's incredulity aside, I pay more to water my lawn or for air conditioning in the summer. Less in the winter for heating costs. Oh, yeah, now we get these massive rain/hail and tornados now. Yuck that up, it adds to our insurance rates overall. Funny, hardy har har. I am not laughing.

Oh, yeah, now we get these massive rain/hail and tornados now.

Yes, we never had those before. Durr.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Just when you thought it couldn't get stranger, Solar Irradiance has dropped to 1360.0 W/m^2. a full drop of 1.4 W/m^2 in just three days.

Confirmed with the SOURCE project that it is not a sensor malfunction and that it is a massive drop that is continuing to drop. The drop in TSI is substantial when you consider that just a 1.5W/m^2 will result in a 2 to 4 deg C drop on earth in rather short order.. They are hopeful that this is a short term drop and when the sun spots return to the face so will TSI.

These types of drops have been very rarely recorded with major sun spots and if they persist long enough it could result in an ice age.

This drop is different than previous ones, which were much smaller and were very short in duration...

Going to be watching this one with great interest... How low will it go and for how long..??

Polar icecaps are melting, sea levels are rising. I have to pay more to water my grass, I pay more for electricity because of the high demand of air conditioning? It's a liberal plot? Right.

I pay more for electricity because of the high demand of air conditioning?

More likely your higher rates are due to "green" mandates.
Gotta pay for that unreliable wind and solar power, doncha know.

on the other hand millions and millions more people can now afford air conditioning

thanks to capitalism

 

[Old Rocks]

Actually my low electrical rates come from the socialism that built the dams on the Colombia.

 

[Old Rocks]

Yes, socialism. The government supplied the money for those dams. And they gave us the electricity to build the 17's that were part of winning the war in Europe.

 

[MaryL]

I don't know what to say. Summers are getting drier, farmers and us urbanites have to pay more for water. Not making that up. Don't care what the rest of you think, water rates are up and food prices are going up. You can contradict me all you want, that isn't going to contradict reality. You are whistling past the graveyard if you are pretending global warming is a liberal dream. It is just reality

 

[Old Rocks]

What we are seeing is increasingly chaotic weather with rainfalls varying dramatically from year to year. Excaberated by an increasing number of people dependent on the rainfall, or being flooded by that rainfall.

The laws of physics do not know liberal or conservative. They do what they do, whether the GHGs are introduced by Trapp Volcanics or coal burning generating plants.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I don't know what to say. Summers are getting drier, farmers and us urbanites have to pay more for water. Not making that up. Don't care what the rest of you think, water rates are up and food prices are going up. You can contradict me all you want, that isn't going to contradict reality. You are whistling past the graveyard if you are pretending global warming is a liberal dream. It is just reality

You can contradict me all you want, that isn't going to contradict reality.

You're right, the climate was ideal, no problems ever, before fossil fuels. Durr.

 

[Old Rocks]

I don't know what to say. Summers are getting drier, farmers and us urbanites have to pay more for water. Not making that up. Don't care what the rest of you think, water rates are up and food prices are going up. You can contradict me all you want, that isn't going to contradict reality. You are whistling past the graveyard if you are pretending global warming is a liberal dream. It is just reality

You can contradict me all you want, that isn't going to contradict reality.

You're right, the climate was ideal, no problems ever, before fossil fuels. Durr.

Silly ass, that is not at all what Mary said. And your answer is a serious and dishonest attempt to steer the conversation away from the factual content of her post.

That is all that we seem to get from you, dishonesty and lies. That some here take a minor dive in TSI and try to magnify it into a major cooling period, at a time when we are experiancing record high temperatures is an example of their panic at what is happening at present. Their whole story is shown to be lies and shams. Political stories for the benefit of those that are creating a very bad situation for the all of us.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

What we are seeing is increasingly chaotic weather with rainfalls varying dramatically from year to year. Excaberated by an increasing number of people dependent on the rainfall, or being flooded by that rainfall.

The laws of physics do not know liberal or conservative. They do what they do, whether the GHGs are introduced by Trapp Volcanics or coal burning generating plants.

So you should have no problem demonstrating these laws of physics in a lab

 

[flacaltenn]

Pitiful pickin's there. Especially the part where the IPCC always TOSSES the baseline completely OUT and just hoists the cyclical portion of "solar activity" as an "IPCC definition of solar forcing. It's always been contrived and deceptive..

http://www.climatechange2013.org/images/uploads/WGIAR5_WGI-12Doc2b_FinalDraft_Chapter08.pdf

Figure 8-10 in AR5 shows the baseline of ~1361 very clearly. So what is the problem you're having. Do you think the graph scale should run from 0-1363, so that the signal is almost completely invisible?

So -- no more expectations that the temperature result has to look EXACTLY LIKE the forcing mechanism???

Why do you think the result has to look like the forcing mechanism? I certainly never said it should, so that has to be your idea. I just point out that an accelerating output after a step function doesn't match how any real world system behaves. Output is supposed to initially jump up then gradually level off to a new equilibrium, not keep accelerating.

Wow man -- you're making great retarded progress.. Now that learned a little systems theory lingo -- we should clear up your misuses and poor understanding of "spectrum".. Maybe a little Fourier synthesis would help eh?

If you want to be taken seriously, you have to do something besides the endless handwaving. Do some actual science. Tell everyone what this solar-based system is. Quantify it. Show it hindcasts correctly. Make predictions with it, and have those predictions come true. You know, do like the climate scientists have done so successfully, hence the reason they have so much credibility. You don't get credibility just by complaining.

Bullshit.. I can give you DOZENS of real systems that have ramp or near-linear outputs from step function inputs. You wouldn't have MADE that stupid statement if you realized what an integral of a step function was.. Or what what shapes a high order LPFilter might produce from a step input. So much for your retarded progress in recognizing the functional effects of delays, storage, and feedback mechanisms in complex systems..

And as far as the IPCC "TSI graph" is concerned.. Why only show the last 30 years if all these RECOGNIZED delays and storage elements exist??? Aren't we discussing effects that presumably have effects out to 80 and 100 years??? When it comes tto their famous "Forcings Since 1850" Table -- They simply toss TSI and it's baseline right the hell out the window. And invent their OWN definition of "solar forcing" based on SunSpot #s and RECENT phases of solar "activity".. NO WHERE do they ever include the baseline rise in solar forcing since 1780s -- that PEAKED in about 1968... NO WHERE in that table of forcings has it EVER been mentioned.

I just point out that an accelerating output after a step function doesn't match how any real world system behaves. Output is supposed to initially jump up then gradually level off to a new equilibrium, not keep accelerating.

You are a brave turd. I'll give you that. For continually pretending that you grasp more than you actually do..
Almost EVERY calculation in GW is taking a forcing in units of POWER and calculating resultant ENERGY (in thermal temperature increases or storage amounts).. That very relationship is an INTEGRAL relationship..

If you have a step in a forcing function in W/m2 -- it's ENERGY production wrt to time is that INTEGRAL which produces so many Watt-Secs/m2 over a time interval.. In other words. if the forcing function steps up by 5W/m2 it will produce 5Joules/m2 in one second or 25 J/m2 in 5 seconds or 300J/m2 in one minute. Don't look now -- but that's not leveling off to a new equilibrium -- is it? That's because you don't understand the diff between a "forcing" in power and the ENERGY into the system that creates a new thermal set point..

Same thing with your home HVAC.. The thermostat does not make the supply HOTTER.. It INTEGRATES the forcing (basically a step function) LONGER to ramp up the room temperature over a longer period of time. Another linear ramp in thermal energy from a STEP CHANGE in a "power forcing"..

Sit.. Down,... Good Squid.....

 

[flacaltenn]

BTW -- For extra credit.. Realize that the BTK Ocean ate my Warming graph is in JOULES.. And since we all see a fairly constant linear climb in stored thermal energy at ocean depth --- can any one in the room tell me the likely shape of the "FORCING FUNCTION" for that thermal energy storage???? It takes off at about 1960 and climbs at essentially the same rate until about 2000 when it seems to level off some..

 

[MaryL]

YOU are right, things are really lookin' up, can't argue with you. I could, but, no point in it. Global temperatures and overall averages? It IS getting warmer and drier were I live, in the last twenty years. That isn't science fiction, and I am not posting this just to be contradictory. It's just a fact.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I don't know what to say. Summers are getting drier, farmers and us urbanites have to pay more for water. Not making that up. Don't care what the rest of you think, water rates are up and food prices are going up. You can contradict me all you want, that isn't going to contradict reality. You are whistling past the graveyard if you are pretending global warming is a liberal dream. It is just reality

You can contradict me all you want, that isn't going to contradict reality.

You're right, the climate was ideal, no problems ever, before fossil fuels. Durr.

Silly ass, that is not at all what Mary said. And your answer is a serious and dishonest attempt to steer the conversation away from the factual content of her post.

That is all that we seem to get from you, dishonesty and lies. That some here take a minor dive in TSI and try to magnify it into a major cooling period, at a time when we are experiancing record high temperatures is an example of their panic at what is happening at present. Their whole story is shown to be lies and shams. Political stories for the benefit of those that are creating a very bad situation for the all of us.

And your answer is a serious and dishonest attempt to steer the conversation away from the factual content of her post.

Her post about weather being better in the past and awful now contained no factual content.

That is all that we seem to get from you, dishonesty and lies.

Not at all, you get mockery and laughter from me.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Every agwcultists knows the Sun has absolutely no effect on Earth's climate.

yes even though it does on mars and the surrounding plants