tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4142988674703954802.post8168767734069609778..comments2024-03-11T04:54:26.827-07:00Comments on THE HOCKEY SCHTICK: New paper: Increased solar activity caused far more global warming than assumed by the IPCCUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4142988674703954802.post-90494724088395435292013-12-14T10:33:31.279-08:002013-12-14T10:33:31.279-08:00subsequent posts based on this post:
http://watts...subsequent posts based on this post:<br /><br />http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/05/10/new-solar-reconstruction-paper-suggests-6x-tsi-change-than-cited-by-the-ipcc/<br /><br />http://debunkhouse.wordpress.com/2011/06/14/back-to-the-little-ice-age/MShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06714540297202434542noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4142988674703954802.post-79334442884953554682013-12-03T07:39:47.947-08:002013-12-03T07:39:47.947-08:00Full paper:
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1102.4763.pdf
S...Full paper:<br /><br />http://arxiv.org/pdf/1102.4763.pdf<br /><br />Shapiro et al Be10 reconstruction cited in this paper Table 4 showing solar forcing in Wm-2 over 400 times greater than estimated from sunspot reconstructions [Wang et al 2005]<br /><br />http://www.earth-syst-dynam.net/4/439/2013/esd-4-439-2013.pdf<br /><br />MShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06714540297202434542noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4142988674703954802.post-11887521517219092102011-05-13T09:39:54.700-07:002011-05-13T09:39:54.700-07:00@benedict It's not. Well, not really, but it i...@benedict It's not. Well, not really, but it is an upper estimate. So lowering this value would increase the variabilityMichaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08893993855741917734noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4142988674703954802.post-36067595386432519102011-05-10T13:27:31.919-07:002011-05-10T13:27:31.919-07:00not necessarily - there is likely to be a consider...not necessarily - there is likely to be a considerable lag time during which heat accumulates in the ocean. <br /><br />the "sunspot integral" + ocean oscillations track temps almost perfectly<br /><br />http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2010/01/climate-modeling-ocean-oscillations.htmlMShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06714540297202434542noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4142988674703954802.post-10838597625289310002011-05-10T13:17:59.226-07:002011-05-10T13:17:59.226-07:00Be careful about the implications of this. A larg...Be careful about the implications of this. A larger solar TSI variability, in combination with a fixed temprature variation over the same period, implies a lower climate sensitivity to TSI variation.Noblesse Obligenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4142988674703954802.post-78689893486647014882011-05-10T02:19:12.126-07:002011-05-10T02:19:12.126-07:00"We assume that the minimum state of the quie..."We assume that the minimum state of the quiet Sun in time corresponds to the observed quietest area on the present Sun." - Is that in any way a fair assumption? (I'm not being snide - it just seems quite arbitrary to me)benedicthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00057610800481125274noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4142988674703954802.post-33071519971214786202011-05-10T00:43:25.447-07:002011-05-10T00:43:25.447-07:00Interesting, however I'd ask a question.
this...Interesting, however I'd ask a question.<br /><br />this study seems to use proxy linked primarily to galactic cosmic rays. it is linked to solar magnetic fiels, thus to solar activity thus to TSI, but maybe sometime is it less correlated.<br /><br />however the correlation with GCR is maybe the true data. some solarist theory attribute some effect to GCR on climate...<br />is another proxy, related to TSI and not GCR does not show this evolution, maybe we have a new data...<br /><br />could someone precise if my reasoning is right or wrong.Alainhttp://www.skyfall.fr/?p=763noreply@blogger.com