Mathematician: We’ll have a SPOT-FREE Sun, possible mini ICE AGE from 2030

sunspot loopsAstronomers working in the years 1645 to 1715 observed many fewer sunspots than they were accustomed to seeing. Once they’d finished saying their prayers, and arguing over whether to say them in Latin or their national tongue, they could then scratch their results onto the newfangled paper before picking off the medicinal leeches they may have used to ward off any nasty colds brought on by the years of unusually cold temperatures that accompanied the sunspot slump.

The lower-than-expected rate of sunspots has since come to be known as the “Maunder Minimum” and a new theory suggests we’re about to get another one.

So says Professor Valentina Zharkova of Northumbria University, who presented the theory of the Sun’s activity cycle at last week’s Royal Astronomical Society National Astronomy Meeting in Llandudno, Wales.

Using data gathered by Stanford University’s Wilcox Solar Observatory, Zharkova and co-researchers found what’s been described as “magnetic wave components appearing in pairs, originating in two different layers in the Sun’s interior.” The two waves move around the Sun over a cycle lasting about 11 years. And starting in the year 2030, Zharkova thinks “the two waves [will] exactly mirror each other – peaking at the same time but in opposite hemispheres of the Sun. Their interaction will be disruptive, or they will nearly cancel each other.”

She’s predicting the result will be a new Maunder minimum.

“Effectively, when the waves are approximately in phase, they can show strong interaction, or resonance, and we have strong solar activity. When they are out of phase, we have solar minimums. When there is full phase separation, we have the conditions last seen during the Maunder minimum, 370 years ago.”

Maunder minimums are of great interest to those who debate anthropogenic global warming, as many feel that the Sun’s influence on climate variability does not get sufficient attention and/or isn’t well-modelled. By 2040, if Zharkova and her colleagues are correct, they’ll have plenty more data with which to advance such arguments.

Read rest…

Trackback from your site.

Leave a comment (newest first):

Comments (3)

  • Avatar




    ( as opposed to the GHE peddling, grant grabbing alarmist crowd )

    this guy probably knows what he’s talking about.


  • Avatar

    David Lewis


    The coming of a mini ice age seriously undermines the political agenda’s of the activists. They have wasted no time in trying to explain this away.

    One explanation is that the last mini ice age was caused by volcanic eruptions. This assertion quickly falls apart when you consider that the cooling substances that volcanoes release, dust and sulfur, only stay in the atmosphere for five years where as the mini ice age lasted 70 years. In addition, if the alarmists are right about the green house impact of CO2, the release from volcanic eruptions should have caused a warming since it remains in the atmosphere much longer.

    Another claim they are making is that the elevated green house gasses will more than compensate for the decrease in solar output. This is of course based on their climate models. That problem is the warming has been only one third of what these models predict. More over, the warming that we have had was more likely caused by an increase in solar output rather than green house gasses.

    The real tragedy is that the political alarmists are diverting governments from what will be the real problem. Lower temperatures mean less food. We are probably going to face a famine that will kill a large percentage of the worlds’ population. Yet, the focus is to control man made global warming.


    • Avatar



      [quote]In addition, if the alarmists are right about the green house impact of CO2, the release from volcanic eruptions should have caused a warming since it remains in the atmosphere much longer.[/quote]

      Actually the residency time of CO2 in the atmosphere is only about 7 years. The IPCC is the only organization who claims otherwise, and that is because they need to program the models with ridiculously long residency times (among other things) to make them do their bidding.



Leave a comment

Loading Disqus Comments ...

No Trackbacks.