A curious article published by CBS News states three scientists, Frédéric Clette, director of the World Data Centre, Ed Cliver of the National Solar Observatory and Leif Svalgaard of Stanford University have concluded that the manner of counting sunspots as a way of measuring climate activity is wrong. The technique is called the Group Sunspot Number, whereby it demonstrates an increase in sunspot activity from 1885 to 1945 resulting in an event known as Modern Grand Maximum.
Apparently, the three scientists adjusted the Group Sunspot Number with of their own that has been labeled Sunspot Number Version 2.0. They have concluded that there was no Modern Grand Maximum showing that sunspot activity was mostly calm since the 1700’s. Svalgaard is a solar physicist and to him and his colleagues the Modern Grand Maximum means something specific. But this study was done to correct the sunspot numbers of different observing techniques over the years. There are sunspot observations going back 400 years and the techniques used to observe sunspots then are drastically different than those of today and researchers needed a manner to make sense of archaic solar observations.
It should be noted that nowhere in this study is climate mentioned or even examined. However, according to CBS News, this new research might result in the reevaluation of climate evolution models. In theory, as the article seems to imply, it should be a blow to climate skeptics most of whom contend that the sun drives climate activity. Fortunately, as the article points out, changes will be difficult since doing so would make it burdensome to explain the documented climate variations that took place for occurrences such as the Little Ice Age. If such climate reassessments take place, then what caused events such as the Little Ice Age? A theory has been posited that volcanoes caused the Little Ice Age but volcanic emissions dissipate quickly and there is little evidence of any increased volcanic discharges in the geological record during that time.
The actual sunspot record posted below shows that there is an increase in solar activity during last half of the 20th Century. During the latter part of that time period is when Earth’s climate has warmed. Since the 21st Century began, sunspot activity has dropped off and global temperatures haven’t risen for almost nineteen years. This is the global warming pause that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) said doesn’t exist after intentionally changing data sets to reflect that.
The above chart is the Solar Cycle 25 amplitude estimate done by William Livingston and Matthew Penn who are solar astronomers with the NSO (National Solar Observatory) in Tuscon, Arizona. They use an testing method known as Zeeman splitting to culminate sunspot data. In 1990, the two concluded that sunspot volume is decreasing and that when the sun’s magnetic field drops below 1500 Gauss, that sunspots will not form. (A Gauss is a magnetic field measurement. The Gauss of the Earth is less than one). If the present rate of decline continues, Livingston and Penn estimate that the sun will be spot free by 2016. The two solar astronomers’ theory seems to be on course due to reduced solar activity this year.
The average lay person does not have to be a climate scientist to get a grasp of the cause of climate change. Knowledge of some basic data and facts shows that there seems to be some sort of effort afoot to re-write much of the scientific consensus of specific weather events, how they are measured and the sole cause. A plot to erase or downplay the effect the sun has on Earth’s climate in order to make human activity the sole cause of climate change (formerly known as global warming). This is what a lot of climate alarmists want to have happen as evidenced by Dr. Michael Mann’s attempt to erase the Little Ice Age and Great Warming with his infamous and now debunked hockey stick chart. The narrative that nothing effects Earth’s sensitive climate except human carbon emissions has to be maintained at all costs even if it means manipulating or undermining science in order to do so.