The US Supreme Court is going to review whether or not the EPA has the authority to regulate “greenhouse gas” emissions from stationary sources such as power plants and oil refineries. The Court will hear arguments and will probably provide a ruling by June of next year. Unfortunately, the Court rejected the request to also review their 2007 Massachusetts v EPA decision that gave the EPA the authority to regulate greenhouse emissions from mobile sources, e.g., autos if they found that greenhouse gases were a public health concern. The Liberals on the Court were joined in 2007, by Justice Kennedy, giving the EPA the licenses to regulate by a 5 to 4 vote.
It was beginning to look like the Sunspots were in freefall based on last month’s 30 day smoothed number of 36.9. But the Sun continues to let us know that we don’t know a lot about it for certain. It looks like the Cycle 24 Sunspot number may reach 70 for the month of October. A jump in Sunspot activity began in second week of this month and has continued through the third week. It will be interesting to see how high it will go. This number is not the official smoothed 6 month lagging number* that will not move up a lot, unless this higher activity continues for several months. See the Chart below that shows, in Green, the smoothed 30 day number at the last updating on 25 October 2013. It is nearly 70 at this time. (Click on chart to enlarge.)
This chart is from http://www.solen.info/solar/. This is an excellent site for monitoring solar data.
*The smoothed number is calculated by doing a 13 month average from the numbers that lag 6 months behind the current month.
The IPCC recently completed its 5th Assessment Report (AR5). The preceding Report, AR4 was issued in 2007. The tasks given to the group that develops these reports are to “assess scientific, technical and socio-economic information concerning climate change, its potential effects and options for adaptation and mitigation.” As you can see from the tasking, these reports are not designed to determine if the warming results from natural causes but rather it has as a given that the warming results from man’s activities. AR5 seems to carry almost biblical importance to the Warmers.
Skeptics are exposing the many significant errors that are in AR5. Yet there is one topic where AR5 and the skeptics are in agreement. That area is “Extreme Weather”. Because global temperatures have not gone up for going on 17 years, the Alarmists had to come up with something new to keep the public frightened. So they began peddling Extreme Weather.
Dan Kahan, the Elizabeth K. Dollard Professor of Law & Professor of Psychology at Yale Law School, is a member of the Cultural Cognition Project, an interdisciplinary team of scholars who use empirical methods to examine the impact of group values on perceptions of risk and related facts. Much to his surprise, his testing revealed that Tea Party members have higher “science comprehension “ than do “not teaparty members”. The chart below shows this result:
Penn and Livingston, in their September 2010 IAU publication “Long-Term Evolution Of Sunspot Magnetic Fields” predicted that Solar Cycle 24 would peak at an International Sunspot number of 66 and Solar Cycle 25 at 7!!
Considering that NASA believes that the peak for Cycle 24 will be 67, their prediction looks pretty good. So would you bet against their Cycle 25 prediction of 7?
While the IPCC doesn’t have an answer for why there has been no statistical increase in global temperatures for going on 17 years, they don’t think the Sun has been a significant factor. They generalize that volcanoes, deep ocean warming, and particulate matter in the atmosphere may be the cause.
Copy of Woodcutting by TheGuardian.com by Duncan Clark
Posted in AGW, Ap index, Climate Alarmism, CO2, CRU Temps, Global Temperatures, Interglacial periods, IPCC, Solar Activity, Solar Cycle 24, Solar Cycle 25, Sun, sun and climate
The International Sunspot number for September dropped to 37 from 66 in August. The F10.7cm solar flux moved downward as well from 115 in August to 103 in September. Both are measures of Solar activity. Again, Solar Cycle 24 is decidedly less active than recent Solar Cycles. (Click on the charts to improve clarity. All charts are by “Solar Terrestrial Activity Report”).
This chart, from Solen etc, is interesting. The black line labled Ri is the International Sunspot number. The Rnorth indicates the number of Sunspots that were counted in the Sun’s northern hemisphere and Rsouth those formed in the southern hemisphere. Rnorth plus Rsouth equal Ri. Rnorth peaked in late 2011 at about 97 Sunspots. Rsouth peaked at about 50 in the middle of last year. The smoothed number is the official count. The smoothed number is calculated by doing a 13 month average from the numbers that lag 6 months behind the current month. The maximum smoothed number for Cycle 24 so far is 66.9 which occurred in early 2012. Most of the solar cycle experts believe that will be the maximum for Cycle 24.
Below is the solar polar field strength chart updated for September showing the south and north poles have both crossed the Sun’s equator. It is suggested that you read the discussion regarding solar polar fields by clicking on this “Forecasting Solar Cycle 25 Using The Solar Polar Field Strength”.
This chart puts Cycle 24 in perspective with Cycle 23.
The projected Sunspot number, shown in green, is also a 13 month average but it has no six month delay built into the calculation.
The IPCC has issued the 2013 report on global Climate change. The skeptic community has effectively challenged the IPCC primary positions. This post will provide a broad selection of those challenges for the reader to examine. Each of the 18 entries will give you the title, a brief synopsis, and the link to that document.
The IPCC failed on two major issues. Their failed to explain why global temperatures have not increased in the past 16 years despite a continued growth of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2). The second issue is that of climate sensitivity. They did say that in the past, they had overestimated climate sensitivity but did not tell us what they now believe it to be. This posting will also cover climate model performance and should the IPCC be discontinued.
Posted in AGW, Climate Alarmism, Climate Models, ClimateGate, CO2, CO2 positive feedback, Domestic Energy, Energy Development, Environment, EPA, Global Temperatures, Government Regulations, IPCC, Sea Ice, Sea Level, solar cells