Have We entered an Era of Global Cooling?

By Tom Harris March 16, 2024

 From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository

With all the sound and fury about global warming, an important, and many scientists now assert, more likely scenario is usually ignored—the possibility of far more dangerous global cooling. It is more dangerous because many more people die due to the cold than the heat. A 2015 study in the British Medical journal The Lancet found that:

“Cold weather kills 20 times as many people as hot weather, according to an international study analyzing over 74 million deaths in 384 locations across 13 countries.”

Indeed, history shows that cold periods are far more hazardous than warm times. That is why geologists call past warm epochs “optimums” and cold times “dark ages.” The plot of temperature versus time for Central Greenland below (used with the permission of the originator, petrophysicist Andy May) is a good illustration of the natural climate change we have seen over the past four thousand years and the related societal impacts. Note how cold periods coincided with hardships for humanity while, in most cases, warm periods were beneficial.

Yet cities such as Ottawa, Chicago, Detroit, Minneapolis, and Montreal, municipalities each of which experience cold weather, at times very cold, all essentially ignore the dangerous impacts of cooling in their climate change plans. Ottawa’s Climate Change Master Plan is especially misguided. Despite the City’s assertion that “Ottawa must be an energy-conscious city where people can live, work and play in all future climate conditions,” cooling adaptation is entirely ignored. As I told the City of Ottawa Environment and Climate Change Committee in my April 18, 2023 testimony:

“As the seventh coldest capital city in the world, it is irresponsible for Ottawa to only prepare for warming when cooling is far more dangerous and, some scientists say, more likely. It would be like going camping in an area known to be infested with black bears and mosquitos and only planning for the mosquitos. Yes, the bugs can drive you crazy, but the bears can kill you. Similarly, heat in Ottawa is not fatal except for the elderly and other vulnerable citizens, people we need to protect. But everyone can die when it is minus 30 with no heat.”

In my articles of past three weeks, I have written about the new theory of cosmoclimatology—how phenomena in space, especially changes in the output of the Sun, affect the climate on Earth. While it is scientifically interesting to learn about what drove climate change in the past, what really matters from a public policy perspective is what this research can tell us about climate change in the future. This then helps us make sensible decisions about where we should focus our efforts to ensure future generations are well-prepared for whatever nature throws at us next.

As I explained in previously, Earthly temperature trends apparently follow in accordance with solar cycles. This should seriously concern councillors from all of these cities since leading solar researchers are convinced that we are headed for a Grand Solar Minimum by about the year 2070 when the Sun may be at its weakest in the past 300 years. This could result in significant global cooling, which these municipalities must prepare for.

The first time I heard about the coming Grand Solar Minimum was at The Heartland Institute's Fourth International Conference on Climate Change (ICCC-4) that took place in May 2010 in Chicago. In that important conference, Dr. Habibullo Abdussamatov, a Russian expert in solar terrestrial physics, head of the Space Research Laboratory of the Pulkovo Observatory in St. Petersburg and, later, the 2013 gold medal winner from the European Scientific-Industrial Chamber, gave a presentation titled, “THE SUN DICTATES THE CLIMATE.” Abdussamatov explained that:

“Natural bicentennial variations in the average annual values of the TSI [Total Solar Irradiance, the amount of solar energy reaching the top of Earth’s atmosphere] caused by cyclic variations in the radius of the Sun together with secondary feedback effects led to 18 Little Ice Ages, established within the last 7,500 years. Every time the TSI experienced its peak (up to 0.2%) a global warming began with a time lag of 15+/-6 years defined by thermal inertia of the Ocean (despite the absence of anthropogenic influence [i.e., climate changed caused by humans]) and each deep bicentennial descent in the TSI caused a Little Ice Age.”

Amazingly, Abdussamatov said that the Sun’s radius varies by up to 250 km during the familiar 11-year sunspot cycle (we are just starting cycle 25 now) and up to 700 km during the bicentennial, or 200-year cycle. And this greatly influences solar output. Specifically, when the Sun was very weak, every 200 years or so, the Earth went into a Little Ice Age. He explained that such research enables scientists to study how TSI has changed in past centuries and even millennia and determine how it correlates with past climate on Earth and so what the future holds as these cycles continue.

Frighteningly, we are nearing a Grand Solar Minimum right now, a time period when many of the cycles of the Sun hit rock bottom. Abdussamatov predicted a deep minimum in TSI about 2042 and “a deep global temperature minimum about 2055 – 2060. The last time the Sun was this weak, the Earth was in a particularly cold phase of the most recent Little Ice Age that lasted from about 1350 – 1850, a period of great misery for people around the world.

Abdussamatov gave a similar talk at The Ninth International Conference on Climate Change, which took place in 2014 in Las Vegas. The conference attracted some 650 scientists, economists, policy experts and Abdussamatov’s presentation was more assertive this time and was titled “2014- The Beginning of the New Little Ice Age.” In that talk, he updated his estimates to the start of the Grand Minimum of TSI being anticipated by about solar cycle 27 around the year 2043 which would be followed by “a phase of deep cooling [similar to] the 19th Little Ice Age … approximately in 2060 ± 11 [years], with possible duration of 45 – 65 years.” He also presented the following graph:

Abdussamatov concluded his 2014 presentation:

“The Sun is the main factor controlling the climatic system and it is more powerful than abilities of human beings.”

In 2020, Abdussamatov published a block-buster paper, “Energy Imbalance Between the Earth and Space Controls the Climate” in the journal “Earth Sciences.” Once again, he did not pull his punches and repeated his forecast of a Grand Solar Minimum by about 2043. The Russian scientist slightly updated his prediction of when we could expect the next Little Ice Age to really bite hard,

“Solar cooling has started. As a result, the Earth has, and will continue to have, a long negative energy balance, which will ensure a slight decrease in temperature. However, this slight decrease in temperature is extremely important as a trigger mechanism for the subsequent chain effects of secondary causal effects of feedback that will greatly enhance the cooling. This will certainly lead to the onset of a phase of deep cooling of the climate approximately in the year 2070 ± 11 [years].”

And

“The total rate decline in TSI from cycle to cycle is currently accelerating and will reach maximum its acceleration in the next solar cycle. The observed consistent downward trend decline of TSI in four consecutive cycles suggests that such a decrease bring backs to a similar decrease during the Maunder minimum in 1645-1715.”

Some people may be tempted to dismiss Dr. Abdussamatov’s forecasts, as well as the work of Svensmark, Veizer and Shaviv that I discussed in the past two articles as unique in the scientific community. However in “Modern Grand Solar Minimum will lead to terrestrial cooling” in the August 4, 2020 edition of the journal Temperature, Northumbria University professor Valentina  Zharkova who holds a Ph.D. from the Solar Division of the Main Astronomical Observatory, Kyiv, Ukraine wrote:

“During this modern grand minimum, one would expect to see a reduction of the average terrestrial temperature by up to 1.0°C, especially, during the periods of solar minima between the cycles 25–26 and 26–27, e.g. in the decade 2031–2043.”

And then there is the 2021 paper, “How much has the Sun influenced Northern Hemisphere temperature trends? An ongoing debate” by 23 scientists from 14 countries, the abstract of which reads, in part:

“It appears that previous studies (including the most recent IPCC reports) which had prematurely concluded [that the Sun’s output contributed negligibly to Earthly climate change] had done so because they failed to adequately consider all the relevant estimates of Total Solar Irradiance and/or to satisfactorily address the uncertainties still associated with Northern Hemisphere temperature trend estimates.” 

And I could name many more scientists who also attribute most recent climate change to variations in TSI. Contrary to the claims of climate activists that “the science of climate change is settled,” the science is very much unsettled and quickly evolving in directions that will make today’s climate scare look like a dangerous and expensive mistake.

___________________________________________________________________________

Tom Harris is Executive Director of the Ottawa, Canada-based International Climate Science Coalition.

 

 

Another Nail In the Global Warming Coffin

October 22, 2023 by John Hinderaker

Statistics Norway, the government agency that produces official statistics for that country, released a report last month titled “To what extent are temperature levels changing due to greenhouse gas emissions?” The report concludes:

[T]he results imply that the effect of man-made CO2 emissions does not appear to be sufficiently strong to cause systematic changes in the pattern of the temperature fluctuations. In other words, our analysis indicates that with the current level of knowledge, it seems impossible to determine how much of the temperature increase is due to emissions of CO2.

The report looks at the last 400,000+ years of Earth’s climate history:.............To Read More....

The Climate is Indeed Changing – Grab a Warm Jacket - October 31, 2023 By Brian C. Joondeph -  Over the past few years, we have been lectured to by professed scientists to “follow the science,” echoed by the corporate media that often sees financial gain in following particular views of science.  For example, Pfizer is alleged to sponsor 15 television news shows, a sure fire way to get their version of “the science” (and their products) out to the masses............Or Steve Kirsch’s recent unsettling analysis, “The data is clear and consistent. The COVID vaccine killed 3.5X as many people as the COVID virus.”\  What are other examples of science morphing into propaganda? How about global warming, a.k.a. climate change?...........

Thailand’s tiger turnaround contradicts climate fearmongering - October 31, 2023 By Vijay Jayaraj - Thailand’s protected forest areas are home to the Indochinese tiger, known by its biological name Panthera tigris corbetti. Recent population numbers suggest that the tiger is making a comeback. Tiger populations in two of Thailand’s wildlife sanctuaries grew from 42 in 2012 to about 100 in 2022. The resurgence is one more conservation success story that defies the climate-obsessed mainstream media's doomsday narrative, which has been blaming anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions for real and fabricated declines in animal numbers and even outright extinctions.,,,,,,,,,,,, 

 Another day, another climate ‘tipping point’  - October 31, 2023 By Jack Hellner - Dozens of scientists say we have hit the tipping point… again. It is amazing how often we’ve hit this tipping point, yet things don’t seem to be as dire as “they” predicted. From CNN via Yahoo News:

Human actions have pushed the world into the danger zone on several key indicators of planetary health, threatening to trigger dramatic changes in conditions on Earth, according to a new analysis from 29 scientists in eight countries.

Then, former climate scientist at NASA James Hansen said it is far worse than he originally anticipated in 1988:............

How much more evidence does the press need that global warming is otherwise known as 'the weather'?

October 20, 2022 By Jack Hellner

For 150 years, there has been exponential growth in the use of coal, oil, crude oil, gasoline, propane, and heating oil. There has been a massive increase in the use of cars, trucks, CO2, methane, the population, and numerous other things we are told cause an existential threat of rapid warming of the Earth.   If all of the things that we are told cause warming actually did that, we would not see the record cold temperatures throughout  significant portions of the U.S. in October 2022.

 

Such as here:

Cold blast to bring record-breaking temperatures to large part of U.S. this week The chilly temps could affect more than 60 million people as far west as Colorado and south into Florida, according to the National Weather Service. High temperatures in Midwestern, Northeastern and even Southeastern states are expected to be 10 to 25 degrees below average, with low temperatures near freezing possible as far south in cities like Atlanta and Jackson, Mississippi.

How many pieces of scientific data are necessary that show the climate has always changed cyclically and naturally before this fraud ends, or before the media asks questions and does research instead of just repeating talking points?

 

John Kerry, Al Gore, Joe Biden, Bill Gates, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and others should be asked the simple question: How do we have record cold temperatures after 150 years of the exponential growth of natural resources if that causes warming? ...........To Read More...

The Climate Crisis Of 536 AD

Written by the I&I Editorial Board

Earth’s climate is always changing. But despite the warming hysterics’ wild claims, it’s not changing at an alarming rate. Remember, when they cite United Nations reports warning of soaring temperatures and rising sea levels, the projections cover many decades, not just a few years. Of course there was a moment when the climate did change rapidly. It was so long ago, though, none of us can remember it.

Yet it happened. Many centuries before the first oil well was drilled. Almost 1,500 years ago. 

The foundation of the global warming obsession on the left is largely based on U.N. predictions that assign significant but unrealistic increases in global temperatures and sea level due to increasing levels of CO2 in our atmosphere.

For instance, the U.N. has said the global temperature could increase over a range from 4.5 degrees Celsius to 6 degrees Celsius some time between 2081 to 2100. It has also said sea levels could rise 2 meters by 2100. Neither is possible, says H. Sterling Burnett, director of the Heartland Institute’s climate and environment center. Both would require us “to burn every molecule of fossil fuel and more” than can be found on Earth. Not only are these worst-case-scenario estimates that will never unfold, the disasters predicted are far into the future, meaning the numbers so easily tossed around are useful for only one thing: scaring the public and ramming through expensive and worthless green legislation.

Despite the assurances from the fanatics that we’re heading into, or are already in, a crisis in which the climate abruptly shifts, even their ugliest fever dreams can’t compare to what happened in 536 AD.

According to the History Of Yesterday:

From the research done by scientists, it is said that AD 536 was the coldest year in the last 2300 years, which made the winter season a survival season for most cultures. Contemporary scholars also tell us that it is not only the fact that it was a really cold winter that made it a bad year but also many strange events where the climate changed all of a sudden.

During this period of sudden climate change, it snowed in China during the summer, South America endured three months of heavy rain followed by three months of drought, and famine was apparently widespread enough to  contribute “to the collapse of many cultures around the world.”

Science says it was “the worst year to be alive.”....................To Read More....

• The UN’s secret is out: It owns the science and there’s nothing you can do about it October 3, 2022 Melissa Fleming made this startling announcement at the most obvious place of all for an announcement about world domination.

 

Global Cooling! But This Isn't a Schadenfreude Moment

By Rich Kozlovich

The Germans have a word that appears in literature quite often, and is one I use quite a bit.  It's schadenfreude.  There's no direct English equivalent but basically it means "pleasure derived by someone from another person's misfortune", and generally the implication the misfortune being suffered is being suffered by people who deserve it.  

Well, I've been right about all this twattle about Anthropogenic Climate Change from the beginning.  Global Warming claims has made scientific integrity an oxymoron.  The  of scientists is at best misleading or at worse, fraudulent, as I demonstrated in my 2014 piece, How Many Constitute 97%?  And there's much more.

But now we finally have people publicly coming out with information that we're facing another grand solar minimum.  And that means global cooling!  Serious cooling! Worse yet, has been the distortion of the historical impact of warming.  History has shown all the warming periods of the past were beneficial to the Earth, and all that inhabits our planet, but cooling is deadly!

With all this twattle about the world's greatest threat to humanity being global warming, I thought it worthwhile to republish this information I published on February 2018.  

Welcome to the world of reality, say goodbye to the world of leftist illusion promoting a system of leftist world governance, because that's what all this twattle about global warming is really all about.  

Andrew West published an article entitled, Deadly Temperatures Are Set To Invade America…Are You Safe? on December 28, 2017 saying: 

"All good hoaxes must come to an end, and this week’s frigid and dangerous arctic blast may be another nail in the coffin for the “global warming” charlatans. The idea that the entire globe is somehow filling with greenhouse gasses, thusly heating the planet up to the point of no return, is patently absurd. Even the liberal science community believed 30 years ago that this process would likely cause a mini ice age, before dramatically shifting to their current hangup regarding an increase in temperature.  The reason for this abrupt change was not some scientific breakthrough, rather, the idea that the earth could become uninhabitable via heat is a much more profound problem."

Unfortunately, this isn't a schadenfreude moment.  You love to smugly say "I told you so", when arrogant, smarmy leftists look down their noses at everyone and declare any who disagree with them as enemies of humanity, flat Earthers, deniers, and more in their efforts to impose a totally destructive economic plan on the world based on the Kyoto Accords.  A scientifically fraudulent plan with the real goal of creating a scheme of worldwide governance under the United Nations.  Even a past president of France, Jacques Chirac acknowledged the Kyoto Accord was the first step in global governance.

 

However, this cooling trend is what many of us who've been on the right side of this issue from the beginning has been expecting for some time:  The potential for another solar minimum, and they're deadly!

 

The last minimum was during what's called the Dalton Minimum, which was another low sun spot period starting "about 1790 to 1830 or 1796 to 1820, corresponding to the period solar cycle 4 to solar cycle 7."  "Like the Maunder Minimum, 1645 - 1715, and Sporer Minimum 1460 -1550, the Dalton Minimum coincided with a period of lower-than-average global temperatures.  During that period, there was a variation of temperature of about 1 °C in Germany." 

 

Some are claiming the cause for that cooling was a result of volcanism - and while that may have been a contributing factor - the fact of the matter is the cooling temperatures and solar minimum patterns are solid evidence, and that pattern is playing out right now.

 

But here's something to think about.  There's no consistent pattern as to how long these minimums go on.  The Maunder Minimum started in "about 1645 and continuing to about 1715", about 70 years, and if the Dalton minimum started in 1790 and lasted until 1830, that was 40 years, if it lasted, as some claim, from 1796 until 1820, that was a mere 24 years.  But no matter - there was only about a 75 to 85 year period where temperatures rose to level better suited to human and animal survival during that either 175 or 185 year period. 

 

Let's understand this - over the last 1000 years it's been the cold that's been deadly, not the warming.  The warm periods were periods where agriculture, humans and animals flourished, including the Roman Warming Period from approximately 250 BC to AD 400.

 

A thousand years ago that age, now known as the Medieval Warming Period from 800 to 1400 AD, it was substantially warmer than it is today.  Although there are those who claim - through the use of Climate Proxy records this warming period wasn't universal.  Proxy records like tree ring counting, but is that reliable?

 

As a result of Biffa's offerings - tree ring counting that supplied evidence in support of what's now being called the "fraudulent" Hockey Stick Graph - we now know it isn't. 

 

We now know that  not only can it be unreliable, it can be manipulated to get the results the researcher wants, all of which Anthony Watts covers quite well in his December 4, 2009 article, Jo Nova finds the Medieval Warm Period.  It's also interesting no one questioned the universality of that warming period until it interfered with the Warmist’s claims, especially since in Mann's Hockey Stick Graph the Medieval Warming Period and the Little Ice Age completely disappear.

The Medieval Warming period ended with what's called the Little Ice Age - 1300 to about 1850 - which forced the Vikings who lived there for about 300 years to abandon Greenland and return to Iceland. Greenland really was green over a large section of the Southern region.  It's also known from the historical records they're agricultural practises were the same as those practiced in Norway and Iceland.  They had to leave because they could no longer maintain those practises.  Because cold kills!  And every warming period humanity has experience has been beneficial.

 

In the paper, The `Hockey Stick': A New Low in Climate Science by John L. Daly he outlines the time lines in this way:

1. Medieval Warm Period (AD 700 - 1300)
2. Sporer Minimum' cool period (AD 1300 - 1500)
3. Brief climatic warming (AD 1500 - 1560)
4. Little Ice Age (`Maunder Minimum') (AD 1560 - 1830) 

• (Editor's note:  I think he must be melding the Maunder and Dalton Minimums in this time frame.  One thing we all have to acknowledge is the exact time frames for all of this is malleable, which can be a source for controversy, but the fact these eras existed isn't disputable. RK)

1. Brief warmer period (AD 1830 - 1870)
2. Brief cool period (AD 1870 - 1910)
3. 20th century warm period (AD 1910 - 2000)

 He goes on to say:

 

"As to what caused these two major climatic events, the most probable candidate is the variable sun, particularly with respect to the Little Ice Age. This is because we have direct observations of sunspot counts going back to 1600 AD, which allows us to compare variations in the sun with variations to global climate. Fig.2 shows how the sun has changed over time, the radiation being greatest during a sunspot maximum and least during a sunspot minimum, both recurring on an 11-year cycle."

 

All the claims about Anthropogenic Climate Change are based on two foundations.  The Hockey Stick Graph, which is now being challenged by more and more scientists, including those who previously adhered to this tenet of green religion, and computer models, all of which are failing or have failed, which is why I call that Game Boy science.  

 

There are three things Warminsts leave out of these models that actually have something to do with climate: The decadal cycles of the oceans currents, the sun's cycles and the number one component of our atmosphere which actually does hold warmth - water vapor!  Why are they left out?  Because these are natural components of climate and mankind can't be blamed. 

 

Computer models are an important part of science as it allows scientists to test new ideas quickly, then change the parameters to see what comes out, allowing for more speculation.  But speculation isn't science!  It’s a component of science which can allows for shortcuts in deciding what areas they need to pay attention to in order to do real science.  Science based on actual observation, not speculation.   Actual science is observable, recordable and repeatable!

 

We're hearing all these claims of Anthropogenic Climate Change and disaster, but we should be asking this:  Why did these hysterians opt out of  the phrase, Anthropogenic Global Warming and choose Anthropogenic Climate Change instead?  They knew their claims were unraveling!  It was also clear the "climate deniers" weren't walking away from the evidence of their fraud so they had to find a way to make whatever temperatures changes which might occur the fault of mankind, and most importantly - capitalism - and especially the capitalists of the United States.

 

But their efforts are failing so rapidly even Al Gore won't be able to further enrich himself with the scam.  The biggest reason is the Internet!  Finally, those who've opposed all the fraudulent claims put out by that neo-pagan secular religion known as Environmentalism, had a platform - an international platform - to challenge these people.  A platform the media would have never given them.  That's why the Kyoto Protocol never passed, and that piece of junk science known as the Montreal Protocol would have never been passed if the Internet existed then.

 

What I would like to know is when are these fraudsters going to be charged with a crime?  The Global Warming scam is a fraud paid for by the American taxpayer.  And the last time I looked: Fraud is a crime!

 

There are a five questions everyone has to ask.

1. Was it substantially warmer during the Medieval Warming period than it is now?  The answer is yes!
2. If the answer is yes, and it is, then we have to ask: What caused that warming period and what caused the Roman Warming Period?  Answer:  Those periods of warming must have been naturally occurring.
3. If those warming periods were naturally occurring why shouldn't we believe any warming occurring now (which stopped over 20 years ago) isn't naturally occurring?  Answer: We shouldn't 
4. If it was substantially warmer during both the Roman and Medeival Warming periods did any of the disasters they're predicting for today occur then?  Answer:  There's absolutely nothing in the historical record to show any of these disasters occurred then.
5.  If these disasters didn't occur then, when it was substantially warmer, why should we believe any of these disasters will occur today.  The answer is - we shouldn't!

We're going through another period of little or no sun spot activity.  Does that mean another solar minimum?  No one knows for sure, but it seems historically and scientifically probable.  It's hard to feel schadenfreude when that happens - because cold kills!