Hi Tallbloke! Looking at the new study of treering data from Kola, Arctic Russia, http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2010-07/haog-sor072910.php I’ve just done a comparison of the treering “temperature” reconstruction, with sunspot cycles. http://a.imageshack.us/img827/2556/kolatreesvssolar.gif Clearly there is correlation with the Hale cycle. I’d like to know if this suggests magnetic influences. ====================================================
Thanks Lucy. I’ve redone the graph with the signed sunspot number to bring out the relationship a little more clearly by overlaying a flipped copy of Jean-Pierre Desmoulins graph of SSN vs planetary alignments. 
It would be interesting to compare precipitation data for the area the trees grew in too.
Regarding magnetic data, I think our friend Vukcevic may be able to help with polar data from that side of the world: http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/NFC1.htm
We would generally expect to see the sun’s influence on temperature getting stronger as the geomagnetic field weakens, which is indeed what the Siberian data on Vuk’s graph shows!
Tallbloke's Talkshop 
Thanks a lot Tallbloke. I put up my findings at CA first but it got snipped, probably and reasonably because scientific exploration is OT for an audit side. But I’m thankful for CA’s initial alert via Pierre Gosselin.
What interest me is how one can mathematically quantify the significance of correlation, which is visually very apparent. Has work been done on how to highlight significant cyclical correlation? I think it would simply founder on the more “normal” linear correlation measures. Two factors occur to me here:
(1) the up-down squiggling. This might be a factor of change of slope ie the 2nd derivative?
(2) the elastic wiggling of peaks, as you’ve seen at work already vis-a-vis comparing JN pattern and solar cycle lengths IIRC.
Any ideas? Anyone got there yet, mathematically and in a way we can understand?
It’s very interesting that the trees do seem to respond to the polarity of the sunspot cycle. This could of course be a modulated by another factor, e.g. precipitation. But if precipitation is affected by the polarity of the heliomagnetic field, that’s just as interesting!
So far as calculating the correlation coefficient goes, if you can get me the numerical data, I can do that for the raw and detrended series. Wiggle matching is fraught with dangers when you start trying to create numerical calculations of confidence intervals etc. The reconstruction is from averaged data, degrees of freedom come into play. For now, let’s continue with a qualitative assessment and think about the periods where the match breaks down, and the possible reasons. The big el nino’s of the late C19th immediately folloed by the low cycles at the start of the C20th come to mind for example.
Did you get the email I sent you last night? I’m getting ready to go to my brother’s wedding, and I’m best man, so I’ll be offline until tomorrow soon.
I note that my overlay graph (from the dreadful Wikipedia no less) (click my link above) goes back to 1600 and shows thereby several more correlating cycles. Can you update Desmoulins to backtrack that far?
I’ll get to it soon. See my updates to my previous message above. First thought is that the trees were responding to oceanic cycles in the C17th. Trees and all plants need light and water, so the sunshine hours at that location and the precip will be the strongest factors. So interplay of solar and cosmic rays/clouds/rain is what we are after, but we can’t have. So perfect correlations are not to be expected.
I can’t add much to the discussion as I don’t have detailed knowledge of this stuff, but just wanted to say this is fascinating. Thanks.
Growing limits at the site may be degree days of energy or precipitation or both. Cold nights can reduce the growth of warm days. Overcast days can reduce the growth during periods of warm nights. Sorry, but trees are a poor proxy for anything but how good growing conditions were for that area at that time. On the other hand to figure out the cause of the of less then optimum conditions might be fun. 🙂 pg
I find a much stronger solar cycle signal in precipitation (England+Wales monthly from 1766) than in CET. There is a good reason for this, hint, in traditional astrometeorology, think of the planets that are descibed as `wet or moist`.
Ulric Lyons says:
July 31, 2010 at 9:13 pm
I just wrote at WUWT, commenting about “unexplained pattern of cosmic rays”
Let´s be aware that CR are mainly (90%) composed of PROTONS, and these are not a shower of little pebbles, as the current “flitstones” universe believers may suppose, but HYDROGEN NUCLEII, so having the ability of reacting with ozone and oxygen to form WATER.
and:
The former “Aquarius Age” ( Aquarius is usually represented by a lady pouring a jug full of water…on our head), was about 12,000 years ago. Ask Noah!:-)
@Adolfo Giurfa says:
July 31, 2010 at 9:34 pm
I am talking about solar activity triggering precipitation, not CR`s. Solar driven short term changes in temp`s decide largely how much it will rain, spikes in the solar signal decide when it will rain, and it is DMS that is largely seeding the clouds, not CR`s.
I have actually mapped out many of the largest flood events recorded, including dates from Babylon, I can assure you they are solar forced events, as they all follow on from very particular heliocentric configurations of the planets.
Yes there is `water falling from space` but the vapour coming off the oceans will be far far more.
CR`s are an inverse proxy for the solar wind, do they do anything else of note, apart from making spacemen sick?
Verity, welcome, and thanks. I’ve added a link to your interesting blog on the left.
Ulric, I’m toying with the idea that Mars and maybe Mercury actually act as dampers on the alignments of JEV. If so, their effect would be to allow more cosmic rays into the inner solar system. Increased solar activity/reduced CR’s are two sides of the same coin.
Reactions to precipitation and length of growing season: both make sense, but growing season makes best sense. The correlation map someone did at CA (?) suggests Kola climate emulates Siberia rather than Scandinavia ie effects of continental landmass and Arctic ocean, which if I understand right, has cycles that lag the furthest behind the solar cycles. But for now, it’s all just correlation with the Hale cycle, not causation. The study claims that correlation drops off in recent decades, but looking at the chart above, this claim looks like the required genuflection to AGW, rather than anything the evidence suggests.
Ulric you said at WUWT that the winter solstice line-up with the galactic equator is closest in 2049.
Source, please? When I enquired in the 1990’s from Edinburgh Uni astronomical department IIRC, they gave me info that suggested around 1998, not 2049. Moreover, what the 2012 folk refer to is, or is conflated with, the Galactic Centre, which lies very close to the Galactic Equator’s Scorpius/Sagittarius crossing of the Ecliptic, but won’t really align to the winter solstice for another 250-odd years.
Adolfo, the last Aquarian Age (defined by the constellation behind the Sun at the NH vernal equinox) was 26,000-odd years ago. Your time frame is for its opposite, the age of Leo.
If the last age of aquarius was about 26k yr ago, we’ll be entering it again about now, as that is around the periodicity of the precession of the equinoxes.
@tallbloke says:
August 1, 2010 at 8:30 am
“Ulric, I’m toying with the idea that Mars and maybe Mercury actually act as dampers on the alignments of JEV”
They augment what E+V are doing, and that can be in either direction.
“Increased solar activity/reduced CR’s are two sides of the same coin.”
Obviously, but CR`s still don`t drive temperatures, or seed clouds like DMS does, so why even mention them. One chilling star says it all.
@Lucy Skywalker says:
August 1, 2010 at 8:55 am
“Source, please?”
TheSky astronomy application by Software Bisque. For precision, care needs to taken to select the actual time of the Solstice.
Ulric, acronym brain fade: what is DMS please.
Dimethyl sulphides?
tb
“Ulric, I’m toying with the idea that Mars and maybe Mercury actually act as dampers on the alignments of JEV”
UL
“They augment what E+V are doing, and that can be in either direction. ”
Have you been able to identify any pattern to when they augment and when they diminish the E+V alignments? Is it to do with the aspects?
@tallbloke says:
August 1, 2010 at 2:33 pm
“Have you been able to identify any pattern to when they augment and when they diminish the E+V alignments? Is it to do with the aspects?”
Wrong end of the stick. When E/V are in a positive position, Me amd Ma can exacerbate that and make it more positive, if E/V are in a negative position, Me and Ma can exacerbate that and make it even more negative. There are some tricky subtleties that are exceptions to this, but nontheless, all well repeatable. Me, Ma and V do some seriously strong things on their own as a triplet too, and then there is the matter of my observations of the well noticable effects of Ceres in syzygy with other inner planets.
This is the area where it’s difficult to bridge the way of knowing of a gestalt understanding and a logical analysis. I’ll keep playing with my algorithms and maybe we’ll get to meet in the middle somewhere. 🙂
Factorisation, and then synthesis, its the only way :->
Coronal Mass Ejection expected to arrive at Earth on Aug 3:
http://news.discovery.com/space/incoming-the-sun-unleashes-cme-at-earth.html
Remember that you can fit an elephant with 5 parameters. How many planets are there? And if you also throw in Ceres?
[ :
Nonetheless: still more interesting than monotone CO2.
Lot’s of great stuff on your site Tallbloke. I like what you’ve done with the place. You don’t mind if I pull up a chair and read more of your posts do you? I’ll try not to bother anyone, I promise. Was over at CA and had 95% of my posts deleted. Statistically, I am not doing well over their. When is closing time?
Warning: Layman’s perspective ahead !!!! A quick glance at Lucy’s graph and the correlation seems to work if you factor in some of the major volcanic cooling events (one of a multitude of natural influences on the climate). Also the 30 year hot/cooling phases are quite clear to me. I have seen graphs of 11 and 22 year sunspot cycles that correlate closely to Canadian Prairie drought cycles. My hunch is that you guys are on the right path. I like Vukcevics work also. I will understand if I get deleted as it has been that kind of day.
David, you are very welcome here, and don’t worry, I don’t delete contributions out of hand. I was very pleased to see your dad linked my blog from his article on Canada Free Press a few days ago. I think more people are starting to realize that there are ‘More things in heaven and Earth than are dream’t of in [the IPCC’s] philosophy.’
Round here, we don’t allow their talking points to set the agenda or the frame of reference. It’s a free ranging look at the phenomena and new ideas, connections and speculations are welcome. I believe this will cause insights to arise in each others minds which will lead to new hypotheses which can be tested against the data.
Good point about volcanos David. I’ve done a list of the biggest eruptions back to 1815 with some planetary and lunar obs:
It doesn’t format well here, but the order is: VOLCANO: Location: Date: Eruption index:Nearest Lunar (P)erigee or (A)pogee with date and time and distance: Nearest Lunar phase (N)ew or (F)ull: Date of nearest alignment and Planetary notes.
PINATUBO Luzon (Philippines) 1991 Jun 15 6 P Jun 13 0:25 357781 km – N+ 12h Jun 15 opp merc
HUDSON, CERRO Southern Chile 1991 Aug 12 5+ P Aug 8 18:09 360100 km N-1d 8h Aug 21 con merc venu opp jup
ST. HELENS Washington (USA) 1980 May 18 5 P May 15 16:41 360627 km N+1d12h May 12 opp merc ceres
AGUNG Lesser Sunda Islands (Indonesia) 1963 Mar 17 5 P Mar 22 4:49 369903 km N+5d20h Mar 30 opp merc squ venus (second eruption may 17)
BEZYMIANNY Kamchatka Peninsula (Russia) 1956 Mar 30 5 P Mar 22 0:23 368814 km F-4d12h Apr 4 opp merc
KHARIMKOTAN Kuril Islands 1933 Jan 8 5 A Jan 11 7:34 406428 km – N-1d19h Jan 8 tri (merc conj venus)
AZUL, CERRO Central Chile 1932 Apr 10 5+ P Apr 15 21:31 368986 km N+4d18h Apr 9 con merc
KSUDACH Kamchatka Peninsula (Russia) 1907 Mar 28 (?)5 P Apr 3 4:38 368529 km F+4d 8h Mar 17 con merc
SANTA MARIA Guatemala 1902 Oct 24 6? P Oct 20 1:53 365174 km F+2d19h Oct 18 con merc
OKATAINA New Zealand 1886 Jun 10 5 P Jun 5 22:37 366504 km N+3d 8h Jun 11 opp merc
KRAKATAU Indonesia 1883 Aug 27 6 P Aug 21 7:12 364821 km F+2d18h Aug 27 Squ merc
ASKJA Northeastern Iceland 1875 Mar 29 5 A Mar 26 5:43 405369 km F+4d 5h Mar 30 sex (merc conj venus)
SHIVELUCH Kamchatka Peninsula (Russia) 1854 Feb 18 5 P Feb 24 1:27 366236 km N-3d 3h Feb 24 con Venus trine merc
COSIGUINA Nicaragua 1835 Jan 20 5 P Jan 22 0:12 370309 km N-6d21h Jan 25 opp merc
GALUNGGUNG Java (Indonesia) 1822 Oct 8 5 P Oct 3 16:55 364834 km F+2d17h Nov 4 con merc
TAMBORA Lesser Sunda Islands (Indonesia) 1815 Apr 10 7 A Apr 3 16:23 404640 km N-6d 1h Apr 11 tri (merc opp venus)
Make of it what you will, I don’t think there is anything conclusive at this stage myself, but the Volcano Strength and date may be useful in interpreting the graph anyway.
El Reg article on the research:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/08/02/arctic_treering_cooling_research/
I agree nothing conclusive. My father never says anything, but I am certain that I have embarrassed him more than once on the internet. Sorry dad !! This acorn fell pretty far from the tree, and I have just enough knowledge to be dangerous. Looking forward to reading more posts on your site, but tomorrow is a work day. Cheers
tallbloke (August 1, 2010 at 8:30 am), Thanks! the DITC Blogroll is due an update and I’ll reciprocate.
@tallbloke says:
August 3, 2010 at 7:43 am
“Good point about volcanos David.”
You reckon eh?
They definitely go off on warming spurts, especially after a very cold season, but I`ll be blowed, loads of them have no cool episode afterwards!
It`s amazing what SNAFU nonsense comes from the `highest sources` these days.
Ulric, I agree that there don’t seem to be big coolings after some volcanos. I’d noticed that myself with regard to Pinatubo. I think location and season are iomportant, as are the winds which carry the eruption debris around. And of course, how quickly the particles are washed out of the atmosphere by rain.
Anyway, it’s just that volcanos were a good variable to mention. I don’t think there’s much doubt the really big ones do affect temperature for a couple of years after the event. Year without summer?
A bit off topic, though still on solar-precip lines of thouoght, this maybe of particular interest to Stephen Wilde if he reads this:
‘If you want to see Venice while keeping your feet dry, don’t go when the sun has lots of spots. Peaks in solar activity cause the city to flood more often, apparently by changing the paths of storms over Europe.
Several times a year, but most commonly between October and December, Venice is hit by an exceptional tide called the acqua alta. David Barriopedro at the University of Lisbon, Portugal, and colleagues were intrigued by studies showing the tides followed an 11-year cycle, just like the sun, showing peaks when the sunspots were most abundant. They looked at hourly observations of sea level between 1948 and 2008, which confirmed that the number of extreme tides followed peaks in the solar cycle (Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres, DOI: 10.1029/2009JD013114).
Records of air pressure over Europe over the same period revealed “acqua alta years” saw a lot of low-pressure systems over the north Adriatic Sea, while in quiet years these systems were further south.
This make sense, because flooding events in Venice are known to be triggered by low-pressure systems from the Atlantic. These systems allow sea levels to rise, while stormy winds blow from south to north, piling up seawater around Venice. In quiet solar years, the storms are shifted to the south, but it remains unclear exactly how solar activity has these affects on the weather.’
I should think Venice records of these floods might go back a long way, potentially offering clues as to jet stream positions further into the past.
Tallbloke, I have to disagree about Pinatubo as Canada experienced two cold summers following that particular volcano. Perhaps there is a threshold for volcano size to register globally. Sorry to see that people resort to disparaging remarks even on your blog. Sad. I have no formal education to speak of, so calm down Ulrich, as I am certainly no threat to you. Educated beyond intellect.
Bob Tisdale has some good analyses of the effect of volcanos on sea surface temperatures. It doesn’t surprise me that the effect was felt more in some parts of the globe than others, but as always, confounding factors and lurking variables have to be considered.
Ulric’s style is to challenge, and he likes people to defend their views with argument, so don’t worry, it’s non-personal rough and tumble of debate. No offense should be taken.
In my field (not climate or academia), there are few who match my capabilities. I do not treat people who enter my realm with disdain, This is non-productive. We can disagree without being disagreeable, no? If that is his style, it is without benefit to anyone. It is a small person who has to put others down to lift himself up.
@tallbloke says:
August 3, 2010 at 12:41 pm
“Anyway, it’s just that volcanos were a good variable to mention. I don’t think there’s much doubt the really big ones do affect temperature for a couple of years after the event.”
It not hard at all to find many that don`t, the only thing conclusive, is that they are all triggered by a temperature rise.
“Year without summer?”
I will run you through a monthly solar forced temperature hindcast for 1816 when you visit !!!
So let’s see you put your data where mouth is, Ulrich.
[reply] The name is Ulric. He has made some very definite predictions about the UK weather between now and this winter. If they go wrong, you’ll get your chance to laugh and point. If they go right then maybe we should be listening to what he has to say about volcanos.
My guess is that because Ulric’s emphasis is on studying the CET record and forecasting for the UK with Piers Corbyn, his statements about volcanos are influenced by their effect on our maritime climate, which may not be as pronounced as effects on Canada.
When you arrived here yesterday you said:
“You don’t mind if I pull up a chair and read more of your posts do you? I’ll try not to bother anyone, I promise.”
So chill out and have a read. Why not start with the predictions page linked on the top bar? 🙂 – Rog
It might be helpful, Ulric, if you give 3 specific post-1850 examples of stratospheric eruptions that did not result in cooling.
I have noted strong diurnal temperature range (coastal BC, Canada) relations with geomagnetic aa index in summer (not so straightforward in winter). Also, there is a remarkable pattern in aa index from ~1905-1945 that relates very strongly to several geophysical variables (including the integrals of statospheric eruption indices and earth orientation parameter anomalies) in a manner that no expert (including those at NASA & IERS) has been able to explain.
I want to back up the suggestion that disagreeing does not require being disagreeable. Agreeing to disagree efficiently is sensible, particularly as there will be countless misunderstandings via online text.
I agree with others who have suggested that this mixing of ideas is a worthwhile exercise.
Going back to the point I raised about possible confounding, (one of Paul’s favourite admonitions), I think we need to pay attention to what Ulric is saying about big eruptions following on from uplifts in temperature. If he is right about that, then since uplifts in temperature are followed by drops in temperature, it could be that some of that natural oscillation is being attributed to the effect of volcanos where it shouldn’t be.
Tallbloke;
“My guess is that because Ulric’s emphasis is on studying the CET record and forecasting for the UK with Piers Corbyn, his statements about volcanos are influenced by their effect on our maritime climate, which may not be as pronounced as effects on Canada.”
You can see the solar signal forcing short term anomalies in most localities. Paul posted me temp` data for his region in Canada, and it was easy to spot. CET is so usefull as it so long, and the UK is not so prone to continental blocking so responds to the solar signal very rapidly.
My forecasts are utterly for a global signal. they have to be if they are short term spurts forced by the solar wind, what else??
The key thing is to work out how that plays out seasonally, and also to figure in polar behaviour, ocean behaviour, and air circulation behaviour and precipitation, regionally, in reponse to the peaks and notches in the solar signal.
Piers has not to date actually applied my temperature forecasts in his own, to his loss.
My statements about volcanos are not at all in reference to our local climate. I`m quite clearly questioning the whole conjecture of volcanic cooling, globaly, and pointing out that the driving and forcing mechanism, temperature uplifts, has been entirely overlooked.
@tallbloke says:
August 4, 2010 at 9:54 am
” I think we need to pay attention to what Ulric is saying about big eruptions following on from uplifts in temperature. If he is right about that, then since uplifts in temperature are followed by drops in temperature, it could be that some of that natural oscillation is being attributed to the effect of volcanos where it shouldn’t be.”
The number of time I have said this (and provided data on WUWT) and it has fallen on deaf ears, I`m so glad you got my drift Rog !
Thanks for clarifying Ulric, so your predictions are global, not UK only? e.g. you have forecast a downturn in temps mid aug to mid sept. You also forecast heavy flooding. Presumably that flooding forecast would be for northern hemisphere only?
Just to be clear, are you saying that for places which are currently colder than normal, and for places warmer than normal, an increase in solar wind will cause an uplift in temperature at both those locations?
Have you looked at local temp data for the localities where the volcanic eruptions took place?
A temperature drop in summer forces a rainfall jump, in winter it will dry.
A rise in the solar signal around the equinoxes warms everywhere, a rise around the solstices gives an unequal distribution of warming, and polar regions move in opposition. So a hot June/July gives warming more in the N.H., pronounced at the Arctic, less in the S.H., and cooling in the Antarctic. Current local cold regions in the S.H are also being affected by incursions of polar air.
“Have you looked at local temp data for the localities where the volcanic eruptions took place?”
Yes, very interesting, especially watching the Iceland event. A really warm streak of subtropical air was drawn over Iceland from 2 days before the main eruption.
@tallbloke says:
August 4, 2010 at 11:57 am
Thanks for clarifying Ulric, so your predictions are global, not UK only? e.g. you have forecast a downturn in temps mid aug to mid sept.
……………………………………………………………………
There is a warming spurt starting around August 27/28th, and reasonably strong, and then a string of warming spurts though September, strongly from around the 15th, and very intense at the end of the month too.
“A really warm streak of subtropical air was drawn over Iceland from 2 days before the main eruption.”
That would reduce the weight of atmosphere pressing down on the volcano wouldn’t it?
@Paul Vaughan says:
August 4, 2010 at 9:26 am
It might be helpful, Ulric, if you give 3 specific post-1850 examples of stratospheric eruptions that did not result in cooling.
………………………………………………………………
Most of the VEI 5 and 6 since 1850 show no following cooling in European temperature, series, 1875, 1883, 1902, 1912, 1913, 1932, 1933, 1956, 1963, 1982.
http://www.volcano.si.edu/world/largeeruptions.cfm
http://members.casema.nl/errenwijlens/co2/t_hohenpeissenberg_200512.txt
http://climexp.knmi.nl/data/tcet.dat
Many moons ago, I posted on WUWT that I thought that a good description of the earth was a magma filled balloon. The skin of the balloon representing the mantle, which I believe would be the correct proportions. So what Ulric is saying is that areas of warming CAUSE the eruption?
Ulric Lyons says:
August 5, 2010 at 1:02 am
What about Canadian temperatures following these? It makes more sense with coriolis effect of weather systems that Canada (North America) would be affected (regional due to small eruption as I said before) and not Europe. I would also like to point out that your posts did not fall on deaf ears, I was more focused on battling the some of the more ridiculous alarmists that posted there. No need to be denigrating.
David Ball; Why do you need to battle anyone?
The alarmists attribute big negative forcings to volcanos and it just so happens that that’s the only way they can get their ridiculously high climate sensitivity to co2/h2o enhanced forcing to work in the models. It also leaves the door open for them to attribute stronger effects to all other emitted particulates and gases. There is therefore, strong reason to be suspicious that they have overblown the climatic effects of volcanos.
I think the alarmists in chief such as James Hansen are the ones Ulric was disparagingly referring to as ‘highest sources’ and he was chiding me, and David (as he percieves it) through me for unreflectingly going along with that meme when he said:
“@tallbloke says:
August 3, 2010 at 7:43 am
“Good point about volcanos David.”
You reckon eh?
They definitely go off on warming spurts, especially after a very cold season, but I`ll be blowed, loads of them have no cool episode afterwards!
It`s amazing what SNAFU nonsense comes from the `highest sources` these days.”
This seems to me to be a perfectly reasonable dig to cause a wake up call. It’s typical Brit banter and shouldn’t be misinterpreted by more sensitive Canadians as a personal sleight.
David has now had four digs in return and I will be wielding the scissors to the next one if he doesn’t take the hint that he should either provide his own data in reply to Ulric’s links (The CET again Ulric – Hah!) or drop it.
We have disrupted Lucy’s thread long enough with this and I’d like further discussion on volcanos to move to the new volcanos thread please.
I will drop it. My last posts were merely seeking understanding. Apologies to Lucy. Ulric came out swinging. Academics should be able to state their theories in a way that others can understand, or is this beneath the ivory tower? I wish people would behave on the internet the same way they do face to face. Clearly, I, as a layperson who is seeking understanding, is not welcome here. Too bad really. Shant trouble you further. P.G. you may want to be taxed on Co2, but I do not.
David, Ulric is not an academic, so dig number five misses it’s mark. You are not unwelcome here. Just take my earlier advice, chill out and have a read around. Feel free to state reasoned opinions and take the replies for what they are, criticism of ideas, not criticism of the people offering them.
I’ve reached the conclusion there are serious problems, possibly fatal, in trying to extract historic solar activity from 14C or 10Be records.
Explaining here is impractical so I am leaving out a lot.
There is possibly a good record of 10Be in Fujidome, Antarctica.
That conflicts with the 10Be in Ngrip, Greenland.
Some results here hint at why.
Antarctica is isolated by the circumpolar current and air patterns. Greenland is very different, is not isolated.
For Ngrip the accumulation of 10Be and ice deposition rate is given, with a computation of supposed radiation flux from those.
There is a great big assumption: that rain, snow, weather is a random process and not solar linked.
Examining the Ngrip data in more detail suggests correlation and computing a supposed new signal makes a fantasy, if kind of right.
Seems there is echo in there of terrestrial temperature data but should not be directly, different signature. (leaving out a lot here)
Is 14C any better? I don’t know but I do know there is little good 14C data.
Aside: I am struggling with the wordpress theme behaviour and so if I do not see a reply it is unintended. (wp notifications are not working properly either)
If Tallbloke would like to email me there are a raft of other things, at least that is the short of it.
@tallbloke says:
August 5, 2010 at 2:44 pm
“David, Ulric is not an academic,”
One cannot learn what I do at university, yet…
@David Ball says:
August 5, 2010 at 1:59 am
Ulric Lyons says:
August 5, 2010 at 1:02 am
What about Canadian temperatures following these? It makes more sense with coriolis effect of weather systems that Canada (North America) would be affected (regional due to small eruption as I said before) and not Europe
…………………………………………………………………..
What about giving us a link to a Canada temeperature series so we can have a look then?
There are more than enough claims of Europe suffering cooling from eruptions, especially the summer of 1816, anyway, we discussing large eruptions and claims of widespread cooling, not small ones and local cooling.
If you want to take the conversation in that direction, just read about the hellish high temperatures that the UK suffered in 1783 when volcanic ash clouds circled over the Island for 3 months, and 23,000 people died.
Lucy Skywalker says:
August 1, 2010 at 8:55 am
“Reactions to precipitation and length of growing season: both make sense, but growing season makes best sense.”
Lucy; tree growth is very site sensitive and most sites have one or more limiting factors. soil quality, water drainage, temperature extremes, length of growing season, precipitation amount and timing.
I spent many years on the western edge of the Great Basin high desert in north east California, and have seen tree growth very greatly from site to site and time to time due to the above factors. A warm growing season may be blessed with rain or cursed with dry. A cool growing season may have good growth with less water then a hot one. Heavy grazing in the area will lessen fire danger and improve tree growth by decreasing competition from brush, grass and small trees as well as improve soil quality due to the grazers droppings. Many of these variables are rare and unrecorded happening at different times and places. Sorry about making a seeming simple thing complex. The only tree proxy that I might accept is the treeline that appears to move up or down as the climate changes. pg
[…] Cycle in English Temperature Record? Posted on 2010/08/06 by Ray Tomes In an article “The Sun Talks to the Trees Too” In Roger’s blog the question is raised of whether the 22 year Hale double sunspot […]
Here is the link to Environment Canada archives page http://climate.weatheroffice.gc.ca/climateData/canada_e.html I was legitimately trying to understand what you guys were talking about and was genuinely interested. None of the comments Tallbloke said were digs were anything of the sort, save the first one. I had never heard that volcanoes could cause warming.
“If you want to take the conversation in that direction, just read about the hellish high temperatures that the UK suffered in 1783 when volcanic ash clouds circled over the Island for 3 months, and 23,000 people died.”
Feel free to do so, but on the volcanos thread, not this one. Thanks.
@P.G. Sharrow says:
August 6, 2010 at 2:21 am
” The only tree proxy that I might accept is the treeline that appears to move up or down as the climate changes. pg”
Frost rings are very handy.