We MUST factor in solar/geomagnetic field strength for predictions
There are threshold levels of magnetic weakness that could result in a major, as opposed to a slight, climatic shift. Many do not seem to understand that the models do not incorporate the strengths of the solar/geomagnetic fields when making predictions, so here are my own predictions.
Earthquakes of magnitude 4.0 or higher have increased more than 25{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117} over the last few weeks. The latest geomagnetic storm (K7) may spur ) even more activity.
I’m waiting for THE ! volcanic eruption.
I said 2018 (the only one) would be a transitional year. Sure enough, global temperatures are down and overall oceanic sea surface temperatures are down.
They are going to continue down.
El Nino: Happy that is what the models are this year and were last year.
Forget Hurricanes/Tornadoes moving forward from here. They will continue trending down on a global basis.
Getting back to the models/analogs: The more extreme either way the solar/geomagnetic fields may be (in this case weakening), the more off those (inadequate) tools will be.
My simple theory is: Very weak solar/geomagnetic fields equate to lower overall global temperatures due to lower overall oceanic sea surface temperatures (less UV/NEAR UV light) and a slight uptick in albedo. The uptick will be due to an increase in major geological activity and an increase in global cloud/snow coverage tied to an increase in galactic cosmic rays. Those increases, in turn, will be in response to very weak magnetic fields.
In addition, there are threshold levels of magnetic weakness out there that could result in a major, as opposed to a slight, climatic shift. If one looks at the historical climatic record/ice core data, major/abrupt climatic changes show up more often than not.
Something is causing it, and it is not the slow gradual change of the ocean’s heat content. Besides, ocean heat content does not matter: it is the surface oceanic temperatures that matter when it comes to the climate and they can change fast.
In closing I say the so called AGW ended in late 2017.
None of the mainstream buy into this, even the ones who do not believe in AGW. They are all stuck and believe in their inadequate models, which are useless in this environment . Even Joe Bastardi, a non-believer in AGW, cannot get into this.
This is why this site (iceagenow.info) is so important, because it brings points of view similar to what I expressed and think is correct.
Salvatore Del Prete is publisher of https://climatebusters.org/
Trackback from your site.
Al Shelton
| #
Your hypothesis sounds good to me. Thanks for that.
Reply
dc
| #
Congratulations! You’ve caught up on the now proven fact that cosmic rays affect cloud cover and thus albedo and thus surface temperatures.
In this paper I wrote in December 2016 in the final paragraph about magnetic fields and “cosmic rays which subsequently affect cloud formation” 21 months ago.
Now, in this PSI article we read …
“The uptick will be due to an increase in major geological activity and an increase in global cloud/snow coverage tied to an increase in galactic cosmic rays. Those increases, in turn, will be in response to very weak magnetic fields.
Reply
dc
| #
The paper referred to is at
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2884148
Reply
dc
| #
Sorry I cannot include the link to the above-mentioned paper, but you’ll find the paper if you Google “Comprehensive Refutation of the Radiative Forcing Greenhouse Hypothesis”
Reply