With the release of Valentina Zharkova's new paper comes some confusion regarding Understanding it's content. In her (vz) last paper references were made to an impending "Significant" drop in terrestrial temperature, leading to climate Anomalies akin to the MM (Maunder) of 1645-1715. I analysed the last paper and found several "reference" periods in History that did not fit to the model predicted outcome, although the syn wave and Cycle Amplitudes were within the boundaries of +-95 yrs the Dalton minima did not fit and the new Eddy Minima fell beyond 2025. The new paper based around SIM (Solar inertia motion) suggests that the new Grand Solar Minimum will start in the year 2020-2055 giving a period half of that of the previous GSM which lasted 70+yrs, my question what timescale denotes GSM? Answer- no 2 GSM's have ever covered the same time frame. References are made to a "Significant" drop in terrestrial temperature yet then goes on to state huge uncertainty regarding "Human influence" on that drop!. The publication also states terrestrial temperature will rise 1.5°c to 2100, if we can establish this then it must include "possible decliningTemperature " or it should not be included as the effects are in the same SIM model. Paper 2 also includes the effects of TSI (Total Solar irradiance) effects during the last MM yet the values established for this period stood at 1365Wm2 (pre satellite era) with a loss of 1.5Wm2 leading into MM. in recent times this value was reevaluated to current measurements of 1361Wm2 which in my opinion is a massive difference to "adjust down", My experience with TSI measurements suggest we are not yet efficient with monitoring this index. The following link shows these frequent adjustments. https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/0004-637X/830/1/25/meta All very sketchy. VZ states the measurements for this period are consistent with terrestrial temperature at this time, so we must assume 1365Wm2 as this was the measurements of that period.There is zero reference to the affects of Solar activity on terrestrial Telleconnections which I find astonishing given the fact these drive most weather patterns on Earth however VZ is not a "Climate Scientist" so I can appreciate it's absence. The SIM model project warming to 2600 with periods where terrestrial T will fall during GSM's yet again no values Given-why? If the model/math can predict warming with/without Human influence it should predict the same for Cooling. Answer-probably not get passed peer, clever move!. Now I for one after seeing the paper 1 expected a confirmation bias in paper 2 or should I say "overwhelming" supporting evidence of previous studies with values and overall effect of the imminent GSM and the message is indeed clear. Can we now establish yes we are entering a GSM. Yes it will effect Terrestrial temperature. Yes there will be a prolonged 35 cooling period ( value undefined). No Human influence will not effect the outcome,(Unknown). And yes terrestrial temperature will continue to rise until 2600 (Natural). If this is indeed the message then we can with confidence state - Global warming is not consistent with the findings of this paper and Solar Cycles will only have moderate impact on climate going forward I here (people chomping at the bit)!. I'm sorry but I do not accept this scenario.
1..every GSM recorded ( only 2) have had a huge impact on terrestrial Telleconnections/temperature 2.. The Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation will transition to a cool phase within 7-10 yrs bringing a change to SST's in the NH this WILL transpose in cooler terrestrial temperature. 3..Since the El Nińo of 2015/16 terrestrial temperature globally has fallen .5°c ( some say the new plataue) the largest drop in Temperature since the Dalton minima. 4..NASA GISS stands at .8c anomaly in 2019 since 1800, not the 1.5c that was "projected" by the IPCC.
5..We have seen an hiatus in GT since 2000 with moderate fluctuations in land temperature which in itself suggests we entered the phase transition to GSM withing the last decade. My advice to those reading this paper is to look beyond the message as I feel it's a little encrypted, hidden for the sake of peer review, and is fully aware economic hardship is near. VZ is obviously aware any paper going against the message of Human caused Climate change would probably not make it past the Bin, hence her reluctance to stipulate values during GSM. It is now up to climate scientists to establish a common ground here and simply stop masking over the overwhelming evidence presented. Respectfully yours. David I Birch.
Comments