BOULDER—Challenging conventional wisdom, new research finds that the number of sunspots provides an incomplete measure of changes in the Sun’s impact on Earth over the course of the 11-year solar cycle. The study, led by scientists at the High Altitude Observatory of the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) and the University of Michigan, finds that Earth was bombarded last year with high levels of solar energy at a time when the Sun was in an unusually quiet phase and sunspots had virtually disappeared.
“The Sun continues to surprise us,” says NCAR scientist Sarah Gibson, the lead author. “The solar wind can hit Earth like a fire hose even when there are virtually no sunspots.”
The study, also written by scientists at NOAA and NASA, is being published today in the Journal of Geophysical Research – Space Physics. It was funded by NASA and by the National Science Foundation, NCAR’s sponsor.
Scientists for centuries have used sunspots, which are areas of concentrated magnetic fields that appear as dark patches on the solar surface, to determine the approximately 11-year solar cycle. At solar maximum, the number of sunspots peaks. During this time, intense solar flares occur daily and geomagnetic storms frequently buffet Earth, knocking out satellites and disrupting communications networks…. continued at the below link
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/09/17/ncar-number-of-sunspots-provides-an-incomplete-measure-of-changes-in-the-suns-impact-on-earth/
For the warmers/science deniers
This study shows that the sun has a much more complex effect on the surrounding solar system, our planet than our current theory explains!
{ 7 comments… read them below or add one }
Give us the real journal reference. Not to one of your professional denialist sites.
It is true that, as your link says, “Challenging conventional wisdom, new research finds that the number of sunspots provides an incomplete measure of changes in the Sun’s impact on Earth over the course of the 11-year solar cycle.”
I noticed this report when it came out, and it does NOT say that the sun explains the 50 year trend in global warming.
Well, from reading your link, I think it says nothing about AGW. Nice try though.
Not much about AGW. As the paper discusses, most impacts from the solar wind are on the Earth’s outer radiation belt.
I find it weird that skeptics state that warming of the Earth is based on the 11 year sunspot cycle and energy output yet millions of years ago the Earth was much warmer than it is today, with a far greater amount of greenhouse gas concentration in the atmosphere, yet the Suns energy output was not as strong as today.
Don’t confuse ions (solar-wind particles) with radiation (visible light, infra-red, ultra-violet, etc). The particles of a solar wind provide auroral light shows and a berrillium shower, but provide only a fraction of the energy in comparison with the radiation spectrum. Solar output is not related directly to the number of sunspots. Sunspot number is one indicator of increased solar output, but not exclusively. The sun can have higher output without a increase of sunspots, and as illustrated in this study, the sun can have an increase of solar wind without an increase of sunspots.
The study is talking about solar flares, etc. That kind of energy can affect subtle things like radio communications. It’s not remotely enough energy to make the enormous change in the world’s temperatures that we’ve seen. The authors make not the slightest claim that the phenomena they’ve observed are significant factors in global warming.
Many papers have shown that, over the past 40 years, solar radiation has, on average, DECREASED slightly while temperatures have increased. One example:
Lockwood and Frohlich, 2007, “Recent oppositely-directed trends in solar climate forcings and the global mean surface air temperature”, Proceedings of the Royal Society A, London, July 10, 2007, doi: 10.1098/prsa.2007.1880
Sunspot activity has no effect on the Earth’s temperature. The graphs don’t match.