jonboy

In ten years time we will have seen a steady decline in winter temps with some pretty harsh conditions being the norm. I expect summers to be very pleasant but short no excessive heat with the seasons being more defined. certainly not warming

Why would parts of Europe be affected by cosmic rays and not others doesn't make sense to me so I do not think we can 'bin' cosmic rays and the part they play just yet GW

No "The significance of the findings was that the results were negative – I found little evidence of the cosmic rays having a discernible affect on a range of common meteorological elements: temperature, the barometric pressure or precipitation," says Benestad. "Not for the global mean at least. One possible exception may have been for parts of Europe, however Clearly more research needed

As ever the reporter is happy to say that a solar minimum of dalton or maunder levels would lead to cooling yet any warming is down to CO2. Come on its recognised that we reached a solar activity high around the mid late 80's yet this did'nt cause global temps to increase. Either solar cycles have a direct impact on temperatures or they don't we can't cherry pick to suit an individual argument. I suppose at least Mike Lockwood is one step closer to the trurh!!

Now that the storm has passed is it time to close this thread?

I believe some are again trying to push for explanations as a means of deriding the poster. I believe what JP has posted is clear and doesn't need further explanation. Rather than asking 'what do you really think' posts perhaps people should properly read the post. I agree with John there is a lot we don't understand about the natural element of how our climate works and one of those is volcanic activity during low solar cycles. One theory is that the earths mantel is agitated and warmed during low solar cycles which leads to increased volcanic activity which includes under sea volcanoes. I am and continue to believe our past warming and now cooling phase is down to solar cycles and not CO2 Keep up the good work John

I need to find it but one off the main reasons New South Wales has seen such hot weather is due to the southern jet stream moving north and drawing the hot interior temperatures into that part of the continent. Clearly this has led to very dry conditions but perhaps without an army exercise there wouldn't have been these fires!! Turning to the movement of the jet stream north would someone who clearly thinks this is down to manmade global warming explain how?

I for one believe that solar influences on the strat are not yet fully understood and with the likes of Geoff Sharp visiting and contributing to this thread can only add to our knowledge and understanding of the drivers during winter. I would not therefore like a separate thread.

Just for balance Knocker when you read the blog you would get this from the comments Wotts, having the opportunity to read Pielke’s views in a fuller context, I withdraw my earlier claim that he has made a mistake. Rather, I have been misinterpreting him as talking about feedback to the temperature response of a giving forcing, whereas he has been talking about the feedback in radiative terms to a given forcing. So please read fully before posting!!!

I will go for 7.9

Hi John there is a whole separate topic I think in the learners area where Roger has put details about his methods and research. In the most simplistic terms he believes key planets affect how weather systems track and behave and he has had some notable success over the years but it is complex to say the least

Welcome Geoff yo Netweather. I always have a look at your website before coming here and your paper on the uranus/neptune effect adds to this whole debate keep up the great work Jon

There is a new paper by Judith Curry that can be found here http://judithcurry.com/2013/10/10/the-stadium-wave/ Which is compelling as to why artic ice continued to melt and why it will now rebound “The stadium wave forecasts that sea ice will recover from its recent minimum, first in the West Eurasian Arctic, followed by recovery in the Siberian Arctic,†Wyatt said. “Hence, the sea ice minimum observed in 2012, followed by an increase of sea ice in 2013, is suggestive of consistency with the timing of evolution of the stadium-wave signal.â€

Some of the coldest winters saw the Thames freeze over. 2010 was a mild summers day in comparison. We rely on transport to get food into our shops London has only three days supply readily available just imagine if no transport could move for a week. Imagine who or how you would get food to the elderly or disabled. Frozen pipes lack of heat and power. No please don't wish for something we are not remotely prepared for.

10.4 for me

It will rise by 2100 but because of the natural solar cycle there is evidence that not only says that we will cool over the next 40 years as this and the next cycle bite but that once the following cycles take effect we could enter a sinilar warming to the medieval warm period but off course that was down to co2

I think solar minimum and I very much doubt we have accurate records associated with the level of solar minimum we are entering. This is a whole new learning curve as to impacts etc

Fortunately we don't have unabated global warming

Joggs are you trying to infer this is incorrect if so I suggest you go and read what Geoff Sharpe on the Laymans Sunspot Count site has to say and look at his peer reviewed paper on the suns modulation by Uranus and neptune. This is important work because if true it may well lay to rest the arguements about manmade warming and the likely shift into a much cooler climate within the next 5/10 years which we are not ready for.

I don't diagree that it needs soughting out just that I prefer the Layman's Sunspot count method as I personally believe it reflects better with the older record. If all agreed we would not be discussing whether the present cycle was nearer cycle 5 or 14. Not enough is known about what drives the sun's cycles so it does become difficult to predict how each cycle will span out but there is some interesting research around how the planets of the solar system may impact on the sun and the level of activity we see. I personally believe that this is going to be key in understanding our climate cycles which will eventually lead us to be able to determine what and by how much we may or maynot impact on that cycle

There are those that believe that this overcounts the modern sunspots especially when there is a high speck count as present. The present method would have us believe that the present cycle is more active than it actually is. I attach a brief history of sunspot counting that I have copied from the Layman's Sunspot Site. Personally I hold more store from what Geoff Sharp has to say than Svalgaard. Its no good just saying that the old methods were wrong as in those early days they had neither the resource or technology and as such I believe you should not alter these old records to suit modern techniques but if anything you should alter present readings to match old thechniques. Counting Sunspots.docx

I agree Karyo I believe we are past solar max and its down hill from here. I believe it is likely to be 20/30 years before we see the sunspot activity anything like this past solar max

Looks more like cycle 5 from this link http://www.landscheidt.info/images/sc5_sc24_1.png

Lower than the present cycle but no doubt NASA will say otherwise

More like cycle 5 which was the start of the Dalton Minimun