60% Reduction in Solar Activity Means a 5C Drop by 2030 – Video

This video is definitely worth watching.

“When the temperature drops like this, it has taken down dynasties, kingdoms, feifdoms.” – David DuByne 

“A majority of our wheat-growing productivity, corn and soy beans, is going to be affected in these areas,” says DuByne.

DuByne includes a chart showing temperature patterns during a Little Ice Age so you can see which areas are likely to get cooler.



Thanks to Larry Brodkorb and David DuByne for this video

“David breaks it down so even a teenage could understand it,” says Larry.  “But they have been brainwashed on global warming, so they will not believe their lying eyes.”

Many links provided by David DuByne

60% Reduction in Solar Activity by 2030, What to Expect
The Sun is Going to Sleep (Suspicious Observers) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7whL9…
Sun to go sleep in 2020 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetec…
Professor Valentina Zharkova
Britain’s National Astronomy Meeting
Solar Cycle 25
Solar Cycle 26
New Sunspot Counting Method Unveiled http://www.sidc.be/silso/predisccm
Irregular heartbeat of the Sun driven by double dynamo http://www.ras.org.uk/news-and-press/…
Sun to sleep by 2020 http://rt.com/news/273169-solar-cycle…
Rapid Changes http://io9.com/5119304/ice-ages-start…
Vietnam Cold http://www.thanhniennews.com/travel/u…
Autumn Frosts Europe https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fb…
UK Temps Frost in July http://www.wetterkontor.de/de/wetter/…
July Frosts worldwide http://www.sott.net/article/298967-Mi…
Peru heavy snowfall http://elcomercio.pe/peru/puno/declar…
Peru Frozen Rivers http://elcomercio.pe/peru/puno/puno-s…
Temps Peru Average https://weatherspark.com/averages/336… incredibly rare snow.
100 inches of snow forecast in Chile http://unofficialnetworks.com/2015/07…

5x more snow=5xmore rain. Look for extreme flooding. This includes, hail, rain and snow at record accumulations. Record rainfall, inundated, blanketed, key words in the media.
Intense Lightning Storms
Volcanic eruptions increasing in number and explosivity
Mount Hakone in Japan was been released by the Japanese government. This long dormant volcano is located 45 miles Southwest of downtown Tokyo. Mount Hakone hasn’t erupted since 1170AD (middle ages), in over 800 years!
In four months from June 2001, more than 800 earthquakes were reported and strong steam eruptions were observed in Owakudani.http://ajw.asahi.com/article/behind_n…
Indo Flights cancelled http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-07-10…
41 Erupting volcanoes worldwide at the moment http://www.volcanodiscovery.com/erupt…

60 thoughts on “60% Reduction in Solar Activity Means a 5C Drop by 2030 – Video”

  1. If we have a sharp economic downturn in the same general time frame, as seems likely, this will really complicate things, as it will probably be difficult to generate capital to develop and implement remedial actions. Being either cold or broke or hungry, is bad enough, but being cold, broke and hungry all at the same time, is quite another.

  2. All of the above happens in Solar minimums, what do you expect when the Sun dose a back flip around the Solar System BarryCentre, Green cheese?
    All of the so called Ologists where not around during the Dalton Minimum, most of them don’t remember what a shallow back flip was like during SC20.

  3. This video is saying what I have been saying. Read below.

    Below I list my low average solar parameters criteria which I think will result in secondary effects being exerted upon the climatic system.

    My biggest hurdle I think is not if these low average solar parameters would exert an influence upon the climate but rather will they be reached and if reached for how long a period of time?

    I think each of the items I list , both primary and secondary effects due to solar variability if reached are more then enough to bring the global temperatures down by at least .5c in the coming years.

    Even a .15 % decrease from just solar irradiance alone is going to bring the average global temperature down by .2c or so all other things being equal. That is 40% of the .5c drop I think can be attained. Never mind the contribution from everything else that is mentioned.

    What I am going to do is look into research on sun like stars to try to get some sort of a gage as to how much possible variation might be inherent with the total solar irradiance of the sun. That said we know EUV light varies by much greater amounts, and within the spectrum of total solar irradiance some of it is in anti phase which mask total variability within the spectrum. It makes the total irradiance variation seem less then it is.

    I also think the .1% variation that is so acceptable for TSI is on flimsy ground in that measurements for this item are not consistent and the history of measuring this item with instrumentation is just to short to draw these conclusions not to mention I know some sun like stars (which I am going to look into more) have much greater variability of .1%.

    I think Milankovich Cycles, the Initial State of the Climate or Mean State of the Climate , State of Earth’s Magnetic Field set the background for long run climate change and how effective given solar variability will be when it changes when combined with those items. Nevertheless I think solar variability within itself will always be able to exert some kind of an influence on the climate regardless if , and that is my hurdle IF the solar variability is great enough in magnitude and duration of time. Sometimes solar variability acting in concert with factors setting the long term climatic trend while at other times acting in opposition.


    Solar Flux avg. sub 90

    Solar Wind avg. sub 350 km/sec

    AP index avg. sub 5.0

    Cosmic ray counts north of 6500 counts per minute

    Total Solar Irradiance off .15% or more

    EUV light average 0-105 nm sub 100 units (or off 100% or more) and longer UV light emissions around 300 nm off by several percent.

    IMF around 4.0 nt or lower.

    The above solar parameter averages following several years of sub solar activity in general which commenced in year 2005..

    If , these average solar parameters are the rule going forward for the remainder of this decade expect global average temperatures to fall by -.5C, with the largest global temperature declines occurring over the high latitudes of N.H. land areas.

    The decline in temperatures should begin to take place within six months after the ending of the maximum of solar cycle 24.

    Secondary Effects With Prolonged Minimum Solar Activity.

    A Brief Overview.

    A Greater Meridional Atmospheric Circulation- due to less UV Light Lower Ozone in Lower Stratosphere.

    Increase In Low Clouds- due to an increase in Galactic Cosmic Rays.

    Greater Snow-Ice Cover- associated with a Meridional Atmospheric Circulation/an Increase In Clouds.

    Greater Snow-Ice Cover probably resulting over time to a more Zonal Atmospheric Circulation. This Circulation increasing the Aridity over the Ice Sheets eventually. Dust probably increasing into the atmosphere over time.

    Increase in Volcanic Activity – Since 1600 AD, data shows 85 % approximately of all major Volcanic eruptions have been associated with Prolonged Solar Minimum Conditions. Data from the Space and Science Center headed by Dr. Casey.

    Volcanic Activity -acting as a cooling agent for the climate,(SO2) and enhancing Aerosols possibly aiding in greater Cloud formation.

    Decrease In Ocean Heat Content/Sea Surface Temperature -due to a decline in Visible Light and Near UV light.

    This in turn should diminish the Greenhouse Gas Effect over time, while promoting a slow drying out of the atmosphere over time. This may be part of the reason why Aridity is very common with glacial periods.

    In addition sea surface temperature distribution changes should come about ,which probably results in different oceanic current patterns.

    • Salvatore, you mentioned doing some research into sunlike stars. Tau Ceti similar to the Sun, and it’s thought that it might be in a minimum phase now. Please let us know how your research goes.

    • “The Astronomical Theory of the Pleistocene [Milankovitch Cycles] merely explains fluctuations, but does not provide a cause for the [Pleistocene] Ice-age” (p.371, The Pleistocene Period, Frederick E. Zeuner, 1959). Plate Tectonics may explain the onset of the Ice-age. The opening of the Drake Passage between southern South America and Antarctica during the Tertiary Period enabled the development of the Circumpolar Current which started to isolate the Antarctic coasts from warm northerly currents. Increasing glaciation on Antarctica increasingly affected the global climate, causing global cooling from a maximum temperature at 49Ma. The progress to a ‘snowball Earth’ is retarded by mid-oceanic volcanism (J.P. le Roux, Prof. Geology, Santiago: A Review of Tertiary Climate Changes in Southern South America and the Antarctic Peninsula. Sedimentary Geology,2012 Volumes 247 and 248).

  4. 60% reduction in the suns output is a big drop, so that leaves us with the sun operating at only 40% output. If this does happen its going to get much colder than you care to see happen.

  5. That will be interesting as I read several times that the temperature between a full blown ice age and a interglacial is a mere 2 degreees centigrade.

    If we are talking about acooling of 5 degrees C then a maunder minium is not in the options , it will be full blown ice age lasting something between 750 k to a million years again.

    ( by that time Greece paid off its debt and Al Gores beach resort will be crushed under 2 kilometers ice , not to mention the EPA offices )

  6. I believe that the current global temperature is 14 C. Also, during the Maunder Minimum, it is estimated that the global temperature at that time was 12.5 C. Just 1.5 C can make a big difference. If we are heading into another Maunder Minimum, then I doubt we are talking about a 5 C difference world-wide.

    Regardless, if solar activity continues to decline so that we arrive at zero sun spots as per the 17th century, we can expect a much cold northern hemisphere. Tropical climates even during a major glaciation period, do not change that much in temperature. The main effect is felt in the northern hemisphere where 89% of the world’s population currently resides.

    • Two good points.

      The article doesn’t define “solar activity” or the 60% reduction and a 5 degree Celcius fall is pretty much a glaciation anyway. In reality the fall in solar output will likely be something like a few Watts/m^2 but the main fall in solar input is likely to come from increased clous cover a la Svensmark or (my particular favourite) decreased coupling of lateral flare currents directly into the oceans as the sun’s magnetic field strength declines. This heating effect tends to zero as the geo-magnetic field strength tends to zero – hence Ice Ages (OK glaciations).

  7. What about the build up to the great solar slumber! Already we are seeing extreme weather events around the world and these can only get worse.
    I would like to believe that humanity will stand together to face the coming storm, LOL, only joking, we know that won’t happen!

    • Extreme weather was characteristic at the end of the Medieval Warm Period and the start of the slide down to the Little Ice Age (H.H. Lamb, 1968).

  8. OK, so the first of the chickens are coming home to roost. Their appearance will be (and is being) denied.

    It must be 15 years since a pal down the pub asked me if I believed in global warming and I said “yes” and then realised I was believing and not thinking. That night I checked it out. It took me half an hour to realise it was politically motivated fraud…so the next night saw me down at the pub having to correct my error.

    I checked out the work of Landscheidt a couple of years later and realised then the real truth was we were facing a Maunder or Dalton minimum and that warmism was driving the world to catastrophe as it still is. The extent of the catastrophe is yet to be decided. Either of these minimums may be sufficient to trigger the full glaciation which is now overdue. That will be far worse than the damage the bankers are inflicting upon the world and one has to wonder whether warmism and banking share a common eugenics agenda as has been suggested by some. Life has taught me that stupidity is far more effective than conspiracy and these statists seem to me to have a greater measure of the former.

    So what can anyone do? Well the statist cause is going to be buried under glaciers. It is too late to change direction in any meaningful way. Another thing life has taught me is you cannot help people who much prefer belief to reason. You can only save yourself and maybe your family and that only if the mob of ex-believers do not get to you first.

    I hope I do not live to see what is coming but know even now that I well may.

    • The problem with answering the question –
      Do you believe in Global Warming
      Do you believe in Global Cooling
      Do you believe in Global Climate Change
      is the answer to all three must be YES, but the Left and Politics has changed the terms. Global Warming means Man Made; Global Cooling means Man Made and Global Climate Change means Man Made. It’s like trying to answer the question “Have you quit beating you wife” Yes or No.

  9. Given the dramatic claims in this video, I went ahead and asked the Professor for a clarification on the meaning of a 60% decline in solar activity. This is her response [edited only for spelling and grammar]

    Hi Pieter,

    This is over-dramatization of the effect of reduced solar activity, I am afraid. We should stick to the facts and not to imagination or beliefs.

    Even in the past Maunder minimum in 17 century the drop in the solar irradiance was nay 3 W/m^2, that is much higher than the input produced by so-called ‘man-mad green-house effects’ responsible for less than 2 W/m^2.

    As result, a average temperature in central England dropped by 2 C (see the doc attached). In the central Europe though this decrease could be higher, and also in the continental parts of the Earth.

    Kind regards
    Valentina Zharkova

    • Her reply does not make sense. She wrongly assumes greenhouse gases have a climate impact for starters.

      This situation with the sun is three fold .

      The first part of the equation is what will be the degree of magnitude change in the various solar parameters and how long will that duration be.

      The second part of the equation is how sensitive will the climate of the earth be to changing solar parameters.

      The third part of the equation is are there thresholds that could be reached in the climate system due to changing solar parameters.

      The answers are not known so it will be a wait and see game.

    • So is she saying that 60% is an exaggeration and that it won’t be that much?
      If its an exaggeration where did that number come from?
      Confused in California.

      • Yes she is saying this blog article is exaggerated. It’s obvious isn’t it?

        If there were a 60% decline in solar output we would get snowball Earth fairly fast.

        A drop of 2 Watts per square meter is all she claims.

        If that happened for 30 years the Earth would lose at least one billion people from starvation and hypothermia.

        Read H. H. Lamb.

      • yes it IS a hypothetical
        same as the present fry n die claims are
        the end para tips you the wink it IS not for real
        and a 60% drop will come…but not until the sun is in dying red mode some many mill yrs hence
        not going to be OUR problem:-)

  10. I am pleased to see that there is a greater appreciation of the problems we really face. First is accepting that there are real cooling cycles and secondly that the powers that be really do lie and commit crimes against us all. It is beginning and a necessary first step towards correcting the problem. I will down load the video if possible and show others if possible.

    • One of my earliest frustrations with the “warmists” was that they were ignoring the fact that the Earth has been going through cycles of cooling and warming for several million years, and that, at present we are living through an unusually warm interval called the “Holocene,” according to irrefutable geologic evidence. These intervals only last for 10-12,000 years after which 90,000-100,000 years of massive ice sheets and much colder conditions return. The General climate models never take this into account. So, it IS nice to see that there is a growing recognition of the “cooling cycles” which, in fact, predominate.

  11. @ Pieter

    Is she saying that a 60% drop is solar activity is an exaggeration? I am confused.

    • No … but she’s saying it DOES NOT translate into a -5C avg temp drop, which is what the video’s author INTERPRETED her claim to suggest. She did not elaborate on what a 60% drop actually pertained to. That certainly would be helpful. Everyone is having to infer what that means. Just the same, even a drop of HALF that amount would be trouble for many.

      • Decided to have a closer look at Zharkova’s press release in connection with this … no link; it was attached to her email reply.

        “We predict (Fig. 3) that this will lead to a significant reduction (more than 60%) in solar activity in cycle 26 compared to current cycle 24. These cycles 25-26 will have the properties of a “Maunder minimum”.

        The first Maunder minimum was reported in 17th century and lasted for about 6 solar cycles (1645-1700) when the solar activity was reduced to a very small number (50-70) of sunspots per year versus normal numbers of tens of thousands (see Fig. 4.5 below). ”

        So while it not explicit, she certainly seems to imply that by “solar activity” she is refering to sunspots, and if they dropped to zero (ie, -100%) we would still have a sun warming the planet. So the correlation of her “solar activity” to temps is ANYTHING but linear.

        • Another quote from the PR ….

          “The restoration of the solar irradiance during the last 400 year shows its strong decrease during the period of the Maunder Minimum by a magnitude of about 3 W/m^2 (see Fig. 5). This amount of the solar radiance reduction was converted into reduction of the average temperature of the Earth. In particularly, in England the average temperature in 17 century dropped to ~8.5C versus 10.5C in 20th century (Fig. 6). ”

          So, I assume that she’s predicting sunspot levels comparable to Maunder soon. Temps rose 2C (over 400yrs) from when that last happened to our recent past, so her reasoning is that we will descend by 2C in temps when we return to that condition (but somehow that won’t take 400yrs but will occur much faster.) Looks like there’s an issue with that aspect of the issue too.

  12. What exactly is meant by solar output, like how much of it produces visible light and how much in terms of infra-red heat waves ?
    So a hypothetical 60% drop in solar activity would mean far less daylight and therefore much reduced growth of vegetation, irrespective of temperaturedrop and probably causing a vast decline of oxygen producing plankton in the oceans and therefore a significant decrease of oxygen in the atmosphere.
    That in its turn could trigger a massive increase in deadly diseases worldwide as our immunesystems would be too severely compromised by lack of oxygen !
    And supposing there will be a hypothetical 60% heatreduction from the sun, that would mean no less than a fullblown iceage imo.
    In the tropics, temperatures would drop from an average of say +35 degrees Celsius to approx. +15 degrees Celsius.
    But in moderate climate regions where the average temperature is perhaps +15 degrees Celsius ?, it would become something like 6 or 7 degrees Celsius.
    But wait, I’ve only calculated it from an average temperature down to zero degrees Celsius. What would be a more accurate reading if one starts counting from let’s say minus 100 degrees Celsius, meaning absence of any solar warmth on a planet with atmosphere, to an average of +15 degrees ?
    So 40% of a temperaturerange between -100 and +15 = 115 degrees, that would be about 45 degrees Celsius above minus 100 degrees, so an iceycold minus 55 Celsius on average.
    It would be somewhat warmer in the summer, but still far below freezingpoint and in the winter dropping to let’s say minus 60% Celsius ! True polar conditions !
    The polar regions themselves would almost drop down to minus 100 Celsius, not a good place to be !
    In the tropics it would mean 40% from minus 100 to plus 35 ,
    averaging at about 54 degrees above minus 100 degrees, that is still -36 below Celsius !
    So in my questionable calculations, a predicted 60% reduction of solar output could entail an ELE event, an Extinction Level Event for life on Earth, possibly excluding some of the ocean marine life, that might survive due to ongoing vulcanic activity on the bottom of the ocean. And maybe also the elite having fled to their vast underground bases built by the various governments in the past decades, and leaving the poor average citizen out in the cold, awaiting a miserable death !
    Maybe this predicted, but not necessarily correct 60% solar reduction output is unprecedented for prior iceages, save for the snowball Earth iceage in the dim past !
    In esoteric terms this period of no life on Earth would be called a pralaya in theosophical tems, a cycle of non-life on Earth, with consciousness withdrawing into the spiritual realms till further notice.
    But you need not fear, this drastic scenario of mine is highly unlikely, because it’s probably based on faulty calculations anyway ! What say you ?
    Amen !

    • You missed off UV and EUV; it is this spectrum that the Sun is variable in. It is a variable star, in a common group of stars which has cyclic sun spots moderated by a series of Jovian Gas Giants in medium orbits. Crazy Ivan stars with a large gas giant in the region of Mercury’s orbit do not show this phenomenon.
      After all, hard science and not soft science Ologists tells us that the Sun varies in TSI by 1% over a “Normal” solar cycle during the preceding Solar Warm Period, at the EUV end of the spectrum it can vary by as much as 16%. But a solar minimum cycle is not a normal cycle, this is the first, and hopefully not the last solar minimum, modern science will observe, but in the future without the claptrap of AGW and media propaganda tools to produce bogus, alarmist charts to frighten American Weather Cock politics, who simply revolve in the hurricane of media hype.
      The next political organization to be sorted out after the EU has imploded is that bunch of liars in the UN, frankly they are just as corrupt as FIFA.

    • No. They need to explain that the percentage drop in solar activity is a drop in electromagnetic field strength, not radiant energy output. (The reduction in sunspots, which are electromagnetic storms on the sun’s surface, is a direct indicator of this drop in solar field strength.) Past decreases in field strength (and sunspots) have been observed to correlate with mean temperature reductions at the Earth’s surface, probably brought on by an increase in cloud cover and volcanic particulates from surface volcanos which become more active at these times. These things combine to lower Earth temperatures a lot more than any reduction in solar radiant heat, which is probably less than 1%, not 60%.

  13. Joe Bastardi who is pretty accurate is thinking that the cold coming is similar to the late 1970’s. I think that is is stuck on the little success he has had using 20-30 year weather cycles. I think that this has blinded him to other weather cycles-like the 200 year cold cycle. For example, the late 70’s were cold, but the Sun was not in it’s current weakening state-it hasn’t been that way for hundreds of years or more. I am not sure why so many people doubt the power of the Sun. Imagine, Northern latitudes have Winter just from the slanting of the Sun’s light…despite being 3 million miles closer than in the Summer months. Try slanting the rays of a weakening Sun and see what happens. That will be an eye opening occurrence!!

    • SC20 (1970s) was a single cycle AMP type event, very shallow, but suficent to reduce the Sun’s output to less than SC23. Sufficent to genrate NAO events on both sides of Solar Max. In fact in Europe, the Winter of 1963 generated a folk memory event on a par with 1947. EUV was significantly reduced during this cycle.
      The NAO for this comming winter may already be in place with High pressure over Iceland/Greenland and Low pressure over the Mid Atlantic.

    • Kenneth: As a resident along the upper Texas coast, I’d welcome some of that cold similar to the late 1970s. So I personally hope we’re seeing a turning point in our upcoming winters down here.

  14. Solar magnetic strength records kept by the Wilcox solar observatory at Stanford Uni go back to 1975 and show that the sun’s overall magnetic strength is declining significantly. To the same point in each solar cycle (i.e. to end June of this cycle) the reduction was 83% for solar cycle 22 over cycle 21, which ended in 1986, 82% for cycle 23 over 22 and 74% for current cycle 24 over cycle 23. That is cycle 24’s mean magnetic strength is down 50% to the same month (77th month) of cycle 21. That seems pretty extraordinary and given cycle 25 is predicted to be weaker than cycle 24 it is not surprising that by 2030, which will be near the end of cycle 25 the sun’s magnetic strength will probably be at levels likely to be similar to 1645. (Please note you have to eliminate the sign of the magnetic field when determining its average strength.)
    So far there doesn’t seem to have been much variation in Total Solar Irradiance but there has definitely been a significant reduction in Extreme UV radiation. So far in this cycle this component of the sun’s radiation is 62% of the previous cycle (23). This is determined from data published by the Space Sciences Center of University of Southern California and is taken from SOHO. Using F10.7 data as a proxy it seems that EUV output is also reduced by around 50% or more in the last 2 cycles. One narrow range of EUV is responsible for splitting O2 molecules in the Stratosphere and Mesophere and generating heat in the process.
    We live in interesting times.

    • I havent checked on this but extreeme UV may come from lower down in the Suns outer layers where the visible light comes from. Remember the proton chain cycle is black! no light. The core would look black.

    • How do they average magnetic strength? Bias against gravitational pull? Or the field strength of flux? Or perhaps the density and activity of plasma layers which create the arching of flares?
      One would imagine that the energy supplied to core would cause effect across all tangents?
      Science will excite me again when the elements that compose an electron or proton can be identified, when the cause of a CME from core can be confirmed.
      Have fun

  15. I believe some readers have thought that 60% reduction in solar activity meant 60% reduction in solar output. The latter would leave us cold indeed!

  16. How many per cent of the world population do believe in the coming ice age? We can only save ourselves. The irony is, there are maybe 99.999999…% of the population in the world still take thing lightly. By the time come, this people will point their fingers at everyone else except themselves. They had forgotten what our great, great, grandparents had to say. Hope for the best , prepare for the worst.

  17. Here’s all the proof I need…back in the early 2000s if I went to the beach I needed sunscreen or I was getting burnt….Now I barely even tan nevermind burn and thats being shirtless in a lake all day….UV radiation certainly has dropped

  18. Hasn’t anyone noticed this is easily as alarmist as all of the CO2 BS ?

    60% reduction in solar activity refers to the number of sunspots but there is no method for comparing energy output from the Sun because there isn’t any data !

    The temperature reconstructions from ice cores have no data for solar activity – none at all !

    We have at best a few hundred years of observational data and less than 40 years of actual measured radiation data.

    Always remember the simple model of the greenhouse effect or Kiehl & Trenberth’s Energy Budget both of which claim atmospheric “back” radiation has more heating power than the Sun.

    That is theoretical BS as is making unsubstantiated links of temperature and sunspots from ice ages that there is absolutely no data for.

    On top of this lack of data there is no doubt primitive peoples survived through at least the last ice age. Real evidence suggests aboriginal Australians have been here more than 40,000 years – full blown glaciation, warming and the Younger Dryas cooling apparently did not kill them off.

    Today’s societies are vulnerable because a large urbanised population depends upon highly efficient agriculture and a small percentage reduction in food production poses serious risks.

    To claim a potentially 5 degree C cooling in 15 years seems over the top to me.

    But, luckily I already live with +6 degrees C over the global average so perhaps a 5 degree drop could take the edge off our summers. We rarely get below 10 degrees C minimum all year and it is always about 18 – 23 maximum in winter.

    I have one spare room for reasonable rent.

  19. wow I’m not so sure if it’ll drop that much by 2030 alone BUT if any other of the ice age cycles materialize or happen about the same time by 2030, such as the change in orbit, magnetic reversal or mega volcanic outbreak of some sort, then it’s certainly possible. But lets see what happens. Worth watching!

  20. I would say that 60% drop in activity will mean that there will be a drop in CME, spots and other solar activity. This will mean change in solar proton and electron flux which alters the jetstream (See Corbyn). Also see the AMP graphs here https://landscheidt.wordpress.com/2009/01/21/11000-year-c14-graph-lines-up-perfectly-with-angular-momentum-graph/#comment-3270. The years she predicts fit exactly with the AMP peaks – troughs.
    ‘if the cap fits wear it!’ Im certain that Landscheidt is correct in his observations and calculations with the climate vs AMP .

  21. reversals
    low solar activity


    Robert has done his homework and gets a gold star.

    My reservation; continental drifting taking place extending the event know as ice age. Let us hope not.

    • Please read my comment regarding continental drift (plate tectonics) of 16 July, 12.25 pm on this page.

  22. I hope they are joking about the 5C degree drop, for that “IS” the beginning of an Ice Age.
    The last Little Ice Age was only about a one to two degree centigrade drop, but a five degree drop will definitely change human life in a quick hurry.
    Although I hope they are wrong, Robert has mentioned this several times: “An Ice Age can occur in less than 10 years”. Obviously a 5 degree drop would be the first leg of a 100,000 year long Ice Age.

  23. David DuByne is just a youtube jockey and should not be taken seriously.

    He wrongly uses the iceage data to construct his temperature drop prediction.

    The functions are not related. Ice ages are caused by Milankovitch principles (ie Earth’s changing orbit shape) and solar grand minima are a reduction of solar output.

    A 60% reduction in sunspots is supposed to emulate a Maunder type situation which is probably a fall less than 2 deg C. The present minimum will most likely be weaker than the Dalton and be shorter…so dont expect too much.

  24. David DuByne brought up an interesting piece of information.
    The Government is changing the way Sunspots are counted which would increase the number of Sunspots. By reporting Sunspots would not allow them to fall to the levels reported during the “little ice age” . Now couple this with the fact that Science is stating the CO2 not only hold heat, but also reflects the suns rays.

    Result – if we enter a little ice age CO2 is still to blame. We reached the tipping point where CO2 Reflects more Solar Rays than it retains in heat. We must reduce CO2 to warm the Earth. Tax CO2 Emissions.

    • There are more spots to count, when you can see them with high resolution optics the problem for the establishment, during solar minimums, or even shallow solar down turns like SC20, the ratio of very small spot and fragments increases significantly over spots that could be seen using 40MM optics during previous minimums such as Dalton.
      Yes there is currently a “high” spot count but the phage area around the spot where the EUV is emitted is significantly reduced.
      Another major problem is that the two counting observatories compete and over-count what is a spot or a blemish even breaking up full sized spots to increase the count. The record cannot at this stage be compared over the historical period.
      The LSC count can and takes this into account.
      The third problem is human nature, they all want an astronomical object named after them for posterity, and they will do and say anything to avoid naming this minimum after the person who predicted it.
      Their establishment prejudice is allowing the AGW Ologists fraudsters the media room to continue the CO2 fraud and waste billions of more $ on a branch of soft science more akin to Alchemy and Astrology than hard science fact.

    • The concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere is 400 parts per million or 4 parts per 10 000. To put that in perspective, imagine a 1 meter by 1 meter sheet of graph paper with lines at 1 cm intervals. There will be 100 x 100 line intersections = 10 000. If 4 of those intersections represent the CO2 content, and they are evenly spaced (in 2 dimensions), then you will have 4 CO2 intersections at 50 cm intervals on that 1 square meter. To imagine that the CO2 molecules can reflect significant incoming or outgoing heat is equivalent to damming a river with coarse chicken wire. The effect will be a degree of bugger-all.

  25. One thing is for certain, we don’t have to wait 80 years or more to see if the “Global Terrorists” are wrong!

    We will know if “We” are wrong in less than 15 years, but I don’t think we are wrong. It is going to get colder, but the only question is: How cold?

  26. Right wing nutjobs”, as well as anybody who actually understands anything about the history of climate on planet earth, believes that rising CO2 is not a significant problem even without a decrease in solar output. And by “anybody who understands anything” you mean a bunch of armchair — I was going to say scientists but they’re not even that — who have red a few opinion pieces on the internet, and yet excludes the people who have been studying the science for years and even decades.

Comments are closed.