Climate scientist Dr. Willie Soon has urged his fellow academics to pay closer attention to the sun’s activity, which suggests several decades of global cooling rather than warming.
Speaking this week with Alex Newman of the New American, Soon, a Malaysian astrophysicist and aerospace engineer, said that “what we predict is that the next 20-30 years will be cold. It will be cold, so it will be a very interesting thing for the IPCC to confront.”
The sun is in a “weakened state” and far less active than during the 1980s and 1990s, Soon noted, which should last until “around 2050.”
“The whole climate system is powered 99.1 percent by the sun’s energy,” he stated.
Soon, a researcher at the Solar and Stellar Physics Division of the Harvard–Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, said that global cooling is a far greater source of concern than global warming.
“We will have a lot more problems were the planet to cool rather than warm,” Soon insisted.
Humanity can solve a lot of problems including overheating, but the problem of a “little ice age” like that of the 1700s, “those problems are much harder to solve,” he said.
“If you want to face a serious problem, worry about an ice age; never worry about global warming,” he declared.
Soon’s warnings dovetail with a report Wednesday of billions of dollars of Chinese investment into elite American universities to promote climate alarmism as “one of the Chinese Communist Party’s chief weapons against the United States of America.”
The U.S. State Department uncovered $6.5 billion in undeclared university [funds], most of which came from China, in an attempt to “project ‘soft power,’ steal sensitive and proprietary research and development data and other intellectual property, and spread propaganda benefitting foreign governments.”
“It makes perfect sense that the Chinese Communists are manipulating fears of a climate catastrophe to its advantage,” the report noted. “The CCP wants the U.S. and other nations to pass laws making energy and manufacturing more expensive while they expand their economy, take our industries and our jobs, and do so with little regard for the environment or human rights.”
“It is a strategic geopolitical tool used by China and other nations that want to weaken America, and the freedoms we enjoy,” it said.
Read more at Breitbart
I suggest that the comments above address the wrong effect.
Changes in solar insolation are well controlled by the large natural oceanic response to changing SST, delivered by convection of the changed latent heat of evaporation to the tropopaise in adiabatic convective equilibirum, while also forming clouds that substantially modify albedo, adding to the feedback, as everyone knows. 150W/m^2 at present. Varibale. Powerful.
Why runaway is a physical nonsense that only someone who doesn’t understand real climate sciences could assert. When you understand nothing, everything is possible.
YES: Solar variability is a small change with a smaller effect, like even smaller CO2, because of the massive negative feedback control that actually reduces the small insolation change by cooling the surface while reducing the solar heat reaching it, all at the same time. SMART planet. Dumb humans.
The important solar effect is the solar WIND activity.
Less proton flux from the Sun means more cosmic rays reach the atmosphere- both solar winds and cosmic rays are protons, which repel. there may also be a magnetic effect…. dunno. The key difference in these protons is that cosmic rays (yes, they are NOT rays, they are protons from Super Nova events popping off all over the Galaxy and Universe), are more energetic than solar protons could possibly imagine. So solar wind protons can divert the cosmic rays BUT don’t have the same ionising effects on the lower atmosphere. They can’t get that far. The cosmic rays have the energy to reach the surface and create a massive ionisation shower behind the, Again, a well known effect, well documented by observations.
The change that is caused by decreased solar wind activity is cooling, and well observed to be so. THis is because the high energy cosmic rays are more able to get to the Earth’s atmosphere and cause more nucleation in it, due to the high energy particle shower’s the higher energy protons create, as well as the unique Cosmic Ray fingerprint of the isotopes C-14 and Be-10, which cannot form naturally in any other way, due to the energy required.
Increased nucleation increases the natural rate of cloud formation at a given SST. This causes the surface to cool until a new lower equilibrium is reached, that mainarin’s the Earth’s now reduced surface heat balance, by reducing oceanic evaporation heat loss and hence water vapour hence cloud albedo, to allow more solar energy to the surface.
SUMMARY: So the effect of solar radiation, and other changes within the atmospheric lapse rate to the tropopause, can largely by negated and stabilised by the oceanic control system, which removes the necessary heat and reduces the solar radiation reaching the surface, so SST’s change little.
BUT the Solar winds cannot be controlled by the Earth’s feedback system, only the Sun can modulate them.
The resulting cycles of 2 deg range and 0,7deg per century variabiity are well seen throughout the interglacial proxy ice core record. Colder when solar wind activity is low, warmer when its high, and that change is in phase and highly correlated with C-14 and BE-10.
Why is all this observable reality so hard for some to join up?
Because it doesn’t fit the consensus, that is exposed as obvious nonsense by the need to understand the joined up reality of how the massively capable climate control system really works. Dominant oceanic feedback that is not bothered by controlling the insignificant changes “climate scientists” claim will create tipping points, when they clearly cannot.
Simples!
PS Hope I wrote that right. It does seem an awful lot of people don’t understand the difference in the different effects of changing solar radiation activity and solar wind activity, and why one is within the dominant latent heat elevator control system’s power to largely offset without much equilibrium change, while the solar wind demands it. Or did I miss something? Do tell….
Do you have any peer-reviewed science on the magnitude of solar winds on earth’s climate?
The LOWEST amount of solar radiation from the DEEPEST solar minimum will reduce the amount of energy reaching earth less than 1 watt per m2 over the entire surface of the planet.
The amount of extra energy added to the biosphere from man-made CO2 is 3 times that (and rising).
Please define “extra energy”. It’s my understanding that energy can neither be created nor destroyed. Also, while you are at it, would you please validate your 3x claim. I’d like to review your sources or methodology. Thanks very much.
He doesn’t have any, Terry. He is speaking from an inappropriate orifice.
Short wave radiation from the sun is converted to long wave radiation when it hits the surface and rebounds into back into space. Greenhouse gases capture some of that energy and redirect it all directions – some of it back to the surface. Thus we have layer of energy/heat surrounding the planet providing a liveable temperature.
Man-made CO2 has captured more of that outbound long wave radiation to a degree FAR greater than can be mitigated by the most extreme solar minimum.
I want to see it snow on all those climate alarmists fools i wan to see them humiliated and having to to admit they got it all wrong
An unfortunate, but predictable, forecast. I much prefer warm weather.
What will happen to all the woke, urban parasites when the food stops arriving?