Sunspot update: In July the Sun produced the most sunspots in almost a quarter century
Every month since this website began fourteen years ago, when NOAA posts its update of its monthly graph tracking the number of sunspots on the Sun’s Earth-facing hemisphere, I post my own analysis, adding some details to provide the larger context.
Of all those updates — numbering about 168 — this month’s is possibly the most significant. Since around 2008, the Sun began a long period where it was unusually quiet, with the solar maximum that occurred in 2014 possibly the weakest in two hundred years. Before that weak maximum begun, half the solar science community predicted it would be a very powerful maximum, while half predicted a weak maximum. Both got it wrong, though the weak prediction was closer though still too high.
When it came time to predict the next solar maximum, expected around 2025, that same solar science community was once again in disagreement. Most approved a NOAA science panel prediction in April 2020 calling for another weak minimum, similar to the one in 2014. A few dissented, however, and instead predicted in June 2020 that the maximum would be one of the strongest ever. In April 2023 however those dissenters chickened out, and revised their prediction downward, still forecasting a peak higher than the NOAA prediction but no longer anywhere as intense.
Based on what happened on the Sun in July, they should have had more faith in their earlier prediction.
The graph above has been modified to show the predictions of the solar science community for the previous solar maximum. The green curves show the community’s two original predictions from April 2007 for the previous maximum, with half the scientists predicting a very strong maximum and half predicting a weak one. The blue curve is their revised May 2009 prediction. The red curve is the new prediction, first posted by NOAA in April 2020.
As you can see by NOAA’s new graph above, the number of sunspots in July was the highest in decades, exceeding the highs we had seen in the previous two months by a significant amount.
The graph to the right illustrates starkly how active the Sun has now become. The green line shows that the last time the Sun produced this many sunspots was December 2001, almost a quarter century ago. The most active months in the previous solar maximum in 2014 never came close to matching these numbers.
To sum up: In 2007 the solar scientist community tried to predict the next maximum, and failed. In 2020 that same community attempted again to predict the next maximum, and failed again. In both cases they made their best effort, based on the knowledge they had of the Sun. That knowledge however is very limited, and does not understand the fundamental magnetic processes inside the Sun that cause its magnetic field to flip polarity every eleven years, and during that cycle go from producing many spots to very few. All the scientists really know is that the spots are caused by changes in the magnetic field lines of the Sun’s magnetic field, but why the field does what it does they have no real understanding.
Thus, their predictions are all based on extrapolating past events into the future. The problem with this of course is that past events do not always predict future events, as every stock broker will tell you. The Sun has now proven this adage repeatedly for more than two decades.
Have we reached the peak of the solar maximum? No one has the faintest idea. This could be the peak, but if so it will have occurred much earlier than expected, or will require the Sun to maintain this level of activity for about a year before beginning its ramp down to solar minimum.
It could also be that the monthly sunspot count will continue to rise. The present activity is still significantly below the most active solar maximum measured in 1957. There is presently no reason to doubt the Sun’s ability to return to that level of activity. Whether it will or not remains unknown.
The consequences on Earth of this more active Sun will likely turn out to be politically profound. There is circumstantial evidence that a more active Sun results in a warmer climate on Earth. The causes are not entirely understood, though research suggests the higher activity results in less cloud cover which allows more sunlight to reach the Earth’s atmosphere. In addtion, the higher activity appears to increase the Sun’s total light output, though these numbers are still uncertain.
The global warming activists who now control all climate research work hard to discourage mention of these factors. Instead, they insist that any warming that occurs has to be caused by the human activity that is raising the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. And they brook no dissent from this conclusion, even though CO2 remains a trace atmospheric chemical, and is understood to be incapable of causing this rise on its own. All climate models posit instead that the increase in CO2 will interact with the atmosphere’s water vapor (the real climate warming material) and cause it to warm the climate.
This hypothesis remains entirely unproven, and in fact the data over the last three decades suggests it is wrong, that in fact the Sun’s activity is more important.
Have no doubt however that if any increase in warming is detected in the next few years, these activists will make sure the Sun’s potential contribution will be dismissed in order to push their human-caused global warming hypothesis, which will then be used for political purposes to restrict the freedoms of every citizen on this planet Earth.
Remember: these activists are not really scientists. They claim they are, but their agenda has always been political, not scientific, and has always focused on establishing some form of socialist or communist control on human economic activity.
Or as one witty person once said, the entire global-warming crowd is like a watermelon, green on the outside but really red on the inside.
Readers!
Please consider supporting my work here at Behind the Black. Your support allows me the freedom and ability to analyze objectively the ongoing renaissance in space, as well as the cultural changes -- for good or ill -- that are happening across America. Fourteen years ago I wrote that SLS and Orion were a bad ideas, a waste of money, would be years behind schedule, and better replaced by commercial private enterprise. Only now does it appear that Washington might finally recognize this reality.
In 2020 when the world panicked over COVID I wrote that the panic was unnecessary, that the virus was apparently simply a variation of the flu, that masks were not simply pointless but if worn incorrectly were a health threat, that the lockdowns were a disaster and did nothing to stop the spread of COVID. Only in the past year have some of our so-called experts in the health field have begun to recognize these facts.
Your help allows me to do this kind of intelligent analysis. I take no advertising or sponsors, so my reporting isn't influenced by donations by established space or drug companies. Instead, I rely entirely on donations and subscriptions from my readers, which gives me the freedom to write what I think, unencumbered by outside influences.
You can support me either by giving a one-time contribution or a regular subscription. There are four ways of doing so:
1. Zelle: This is the only internet method that charges no fees. All you have to do is use the Zelle link at your internet bank and give my name and email address (zimmerman at nasw dot org). What you donate is what I get.
2. Patreon: Go to my website there and pick one of five monthly subscription amounts, or by making a one-time donation.
3. A Paypal Donation or subscription:
4. Donate by check, payable to Robert Zimmerman and mailed to
Behind The Black
c/o Robert Zimmerman
P.O.Box 1262
Cortaro, AZ 85652
You can also support me by buying one of my books, as noted in the boxes interspersed throughout the webpage or shown in the menu above.
Of all those updates — numbering about 168 — this month’s is possible the most significant.
possibly?
Henrik Svensmark, a Dutch scientist, has had a theory for years that cosmic rays hitting the earth are responsible for cloud formation. High degree of sunspots , less cosmic rays reaching earth’s atmosphere resulting in less cloud formation increasing earth’s temperature. The converse, when the sun looks like a cue ball, with low degree of sunspots, more cosmic rays hit earth forming more clouds resulting in cooler earth. His theory was rejected unfortunately in favor of CO2 hypothesis.
@Raymond Adams,
You’ll want to get the book ‘Dark Winter’ by former NASA scientist John L. Casey. It was published in August of 2014,
Amazon synopsis:
In Dark Winter, author John L. Casey, a former White House national space policy advisor, NASA headquarters consultant, and space shuttle engineer tells the truth about ominous changes taking place in the climate and the Sun.
Casey’s research into the Sun’s activity, which began almost a decade ago, resulted in discovery of a solar cycle that is now reversing from its global warming phase to that of dangerous global cooling for the next thirty years or more. This new cold climate will dramatically impact the world’s citizens.
In Dark Winter, he provides evidence of the following:
The end of global warming
The beginning of a “solar hibernation,” a historic reduction in the energy output of the Sun
A long-term drop in Earth’s temperatures
The start of the next climate change to decades of dangerously cold weather
The high probability of record earthquakes and volcanic eruptions
A sobering look at Earth’s future, Dark Winter predicts worldwide, crop-destroying cold; food shortages and riots in the United States and abroad; significant global loss of life; and social, political, and economic upheaval.
“The Chilling Stars” I believe is the book that documents the cloud chamber hypothesis.
When one looks at all the data in the NOAA graph, one sees the ramp-up of solar activity culminating in the 1957 maximum.
When one looks at the retreat of the Athabasca glacier (the toe marked each year) one sees that the maximum rate of retreat was the early 1900s, after which the rate slowed. Mind you, where we used to practice crevasse rescue (60′ deep crevasses) in 1973, it is now bare rock.
The other thing to note is that these glaciers were not present 5000 years ago as shown by C14 dating of tree remnants retrieved from glaciers feeding the Athabasca..
The long and short is that we live in very interesting times!
If the “experts” don’t think that EXTRA RADIATION from the SUN causes HIGHER temps here on Earth then they’re not much of an “expert” and more likely just your run of the mill lunatic activist!
Maybe do an EXPERIMENT! Make several boxes of clear glass or plastic – put a “climatologist” in each box – have various levels of co2 in each box – expose each box to DIRECT SUNLIGHT and then SHADE the box! I’m fairly certain (disclosure : I have a BS in Bus Adm) that the EFFECT of DIRECT SUNLIGHT will cause increased temps no matter the co2 level!
You can do this experiment at ANY time – summer or winter – and the results should be the same – DIRECT SUNLIGHT is WARMER!
Now, when considering all this and the addition of SUNSPOT activity then you’re talking a whole new ball game – it’s like having a radiant heater on LOW and then turning to HIGH – more RADIANCE – MORE HEAT!
I could be wrong – I’ll ask my wife – she always knows!
Remember the shrinking ice caps on Mars!
Sunspots or the sun have absolutely nothing to do with global warming or global cooling, everyone knows that.
This is what is important in sunspots, global warming, global cooling and everything else:
GET READY BECAUSE IT IS COMING
“I wonder, should Nancy Pelosi, who by the way I admire for her stone-cold political ruthlessness of Lucifer, be impeached and removed from office because of her clear failure through ignorance, incompetence or malfeasance on January 6th? Maybe, Hillary (Ma Barker) might also be included and looked at for similar malfeasance while in office? ”
https://www.sigma3ioc.com/post/gird-your-loins-for-political-warfare
“Or as one witty person once said, the entire global-warming crowd is like a watermelon, green on the outside but really red on the inside.”
Oh my, I hope there are no black folks in the global-warming crowd. They’ll be offended – unless they REALLY like watermelon.
“Sunspots or the sun have absolutely nothing to do with global warming or global cooling, everyone knows that”
“Correlation may not be causation” but significant indication of the monitor minimum (with no sunspots for 50 years) was associated with the a little Ice Age.
There’s also significant evidence that interstellar medium from supernovas may have blocked the sunlight as we pass through the Interstellar gases. Along with the oxidization of those gases in our atmosphere turning abundant oxygen into water and reducing the atmospheric pressure and temperature causing a series of ice ages which significantly deviated from the “hot planet” norm experienced for millions of years during the dinosaurs optimal.
In other words, external phenomenon not associated with our Sun and it’s cycle, like comet impacts and volcanoes, are also considered.
It is true that the suns output varies by no more than 1°
That is why our attention is drawn to other factors like increase increase of UV radiation or the lack of magnetic induction with earths magnetic field which has a definite influence for which the 11 year cycle is so obvious.
Cosmic radiation and other charged particles will follow the lines of magnetic force to the sun. The suns magnetic field is at it’s weakest as it’s flipping during the solar cycle when the sun spots appear. Earths magnetic field takes advantage and draws in more of this radiation (documented by the carbon 14 in tree rings)
Every other cycle, the Sun’s magnetic field is complementary to the earth and we see the results in our climate. (rain versus drought, farmers almanac has documented this thoroughly for a hundred years)
As for putting scientist in bottles of carbon dioxide.
You can climb into the dry ice container at your local grocery store and experience how your body reacts to the 100% carbon dioxide atmosphere around you. You’ll be pleasantly surprised to find out that’s not what you expected.
Just before they throw you out of the grocery store.
Carbon dioxide retaining heat is a myth, if it truly had this magical properties… You could heat your soup or coffee by blowing the 5% carbon dioxide from your lungs (50,000 ppm)
Dry ice would start fires, and people drinking soda pop would burp out flame!
Shall we do the math?
CO2 in our atmosphere is a trace gas measured at 420 ppm.
Rounding it to 400 would give you one (1) molecule for every “2500” air molecules. For that one molecule of CO2 to warm the air around it just 1° temperature, it would have to be a minimum of 2500° for a pico second before it’s exhausted and has to reheat. A mathematical impossibility.
Also note that the molecule is a sphere radiating in all directions with at best 1/16 of it surface radiating down towards the ground. That means for the ground to experience 1° temperature rise from atmospheric carbon dioxide molecule, it would need to be 15,000° because the rest of its heat is rated outward and upward into space. Again, lasting a thousandth of a second.
In truth, it’s heat retaining properties are not significantly deviated from other molecules near the same size/mass like oxygen and nitrogen, water. It’s significance has to be weighed against it’s abundance, which is trivial when you do the math. likewise for Methane, at 1.8 ppm it is nearly nonexistent. Like a tempest in a teapot, where the tea pot is empty.
Water vapor is ignored because it’s considered part of the hydrosphere. And yet we’ve all seen the pictures from space, cloud cover average is about 1/3 of earths total surface or 300,000 ppm +/-200,000 ppm. Depending on the season. More than a significant influence, with extreme variability, resulting in an entire industry of modern witchdoctors forecasting the weather at every TV newscast.
Although clouds are present, they do not produce any heat. They can act as a blanket preventing heat loss but overall, water vapor is a cooling medium. That’s why your body sweats.
Water molecules expand exceptionally large making themselves more buoyant allowing them to float in a oxygen nitrogen atmosphere. In doing so they take up space pushing other molecules out of the way causing air pressure to drop. We called this a low pressure system, which is always associated with atmospheric cooling.
When my home is too hot at 105° at 5000 feet, I can re-create a storms “low pressure temperatures” by driving up to the ski resort at 10,000 feet where the barometric pressure is less and experience a 20 to 30° drop in temperature. (same Sun, 10 miles from my house, different air pressure)
This is why I refer to the dogma of the global warming death cult as “fiction fantasies” because it falls apart whenever science puts it to the test. 40 years of atmospheric monitoring with the best satellites we can produce has yet to find one documented case of greenhouse gases warming the planet. (A warmer spot in the upper atmosphere radiating heat to the ground)
The ideal gas law‘s, and the second law of thermodynamics still reigns supreme with no atmospheric exceptions. Dry air cools 5.4° for every thousand feet the thermometer rises into the atmosphere. And the opposite is true as documented by the Chinook winds which “heat up” 5.4° For every thousand feet as it flows over the mountains towards death Valley and Nevada creating a desert. No sun is involved in this heating process. It also holds the Guinness book of world heat records, even though this atmospheric phenomenon does not appear in any of the climate models. Funny that!
Cosmic radiation being responsible for cloud formation is mostly true, but only part of the puzzle. First comes ocean evaporation. Then the addition of hydrogen sulfide from plankton in the ocean which gives a charge to the humidity allowing it to collect magnetically rather than each molecule opposing each other. (this is why sulfur dioxide from jet exhaust creates clouds)
Think of cosmic radiation giving it a “super charge” of electricity, even enough to change the molecules into another substance. (normal carbon in to carbon 14, oxygen into O zone, nitrogen into nitric acid and nitrous oxide just like lightning does)(and you thought it was made by the run off of farmers fertilizing their fields?)
The more electrical currents, the stronger the magnetism which draws the water molecules into a tighter cloud formation/stronger storm. Lightning occurrence during solar maxima has correlation.