July 14, 2015

A mini Ice Age by 2030? Don't panic: We survived the last one

Rebel Staff
 

I ignore most climatology studies. They're too politicized to take seriously. But a new study that's getting lots of attention says the sun's normal activities will decrease by 60% around 2030, triggering a mini Ice Age that could last a decade.

The previous mini Ice Age is called the Maunder Minimum. It lasted about 50 years beginning in the mid-1600s.

If you haven't heard of it, that's no surprise:

Climate scientists don't like to talk about it.

It undermines their theory of man-made global warming.

After all, nobody was driving an SUV in 1650...


JOIN TheRebel.media for more fearless news and commentary you won’t find anywhere else.

READ Ezra Levant's bestselling books debunking environmentalist propaganda against the energy industry:
Groundswell: The Case for Fracking
Ethical Oil: The Case for Canada's Oil Sands


Comments
You must be logged in to comment. Click here to log in.
commented 2015-07-16 23:02:09 -0400
Prince Knight…I remember all the situations you mentioned…first emissions, then ozone layer, then ice age, then global warming and CO2…what a record of political manipulation we have lived through and they are still doing the same stuff that ends up costing taxpayers SO much…for nothing…because, in the end, we are really not the problem and all the fiddling we do has no effect…the climate just keeps changing up and down as nature INTENDED and we believe these con artists who tell us that WE are responsible…guess what folks…the climate will keep changing even if we do nothing…so stop spending our money…and refuse this carbon tax and/or cap and trade…it is just another carnival trick to get our money for nothing.

As for me, my $1400.00/month winter hydro bill last winter ticks me off…( for a 3 bdrm bungalow in the country)…It goes up every year without fail…while secretaries at hydro get $135,000.00/year. What we need is cheap fuel…and I am about ready to start buying coal!…
commented 2015-07-15 08:16:35 -0400
So I guess it still means Kathleen Wynne and Tom Mulcair and Justin want us to give more to government to avert this situation as well?
commented 2015-07-15 07:37:01 -0400
Prince Knight, I agree. I’ve often considered our responses to past environmental “crises” and whether they’ve had an impact on climate, for example, reduction of aerosols (airborne particulate matter). In 1991 when Mount Pinatubo erupted in the Philippines, global temperature dropped 0.6 degrees Celsius for two years. More aerosols in the atmosphere generally lead to increased cloud formation and reduced surface temperatures. It’s no coincidence that when we began actively reducing our production of sulphur dioxide due to acid rain concerns in the 1970s-80s, average global surface temperature stopped decreasing. It’s no coincidence that cities and urban centres generally have greater cloud formation and precipitation than surrounding rural areas, due to urban aerosol pollution and increased local temperatures caused by the urban heat island effect. All rain droplets need aerosols to form around and all storms and extreme weather are instances of the laws of thermodynamics in action — transfers of excess heat until a more uniform distribution is achieved.
Solar cycles also contribute, in that periods of more intense solar activity (greater sunspots, more radiation reaching the earth) coincide with fewer clouds, less precipitation and warmer temperatures, whereas periods of reduced sun activity result in more clouds and colder temperatures. The Maunder Minimum is just one example. Another is the extremely cold weather event that occurred between 535-536 C.E., though this was thought to be the cause of either volcanic eruption or multiple comet impacts with the Earth.
On the whole, I just can’t take any of these climate models seriously. 2030 is only 15 years away, and I can wait that long to see for myself (hopefully).
commented 2015-07-14 21:15:01 -0400
Kenneth, and Kenneth.
Kenneth Lawrence is the one I agree with.
commented 2015-07-14 21:12:05 -0400
I posted before I read your most recent post Kenneth.. I agree with you 100%
commented 2015-07-14 21:07:22 -0400
He doesn’t read anything NASA puts out?
commented 2015-07-14 20:59:51 -0400
The sun is currently on the second half of the current 11 year solar sunspot cycle that solar scientists all solar cycle 24. It’s a time of high solar flare activity, as is typical on the downside of a solar cycle. But the next cycle, #25, is projected to be the coolest one in several hundred years, and the last time this happened, we had the Little Ice Age. So if the projections are right, Earth is in for the coldest global climate in a long time, starting about six years from now. In fact, if the fudge factors are taken out of temperature data for the last two decades, Earth has been steadily cooling, not warming, for eighteen years. The man-made climate change theory is wrong, plain and simple, and the MSM are propagating an enormous hoax. Google ‘Call it the mystery of the missing thermometers’ and read the Jan. 2010 article by Richard Foot in the National Post.
commented 2015-07-14 20:34:09 -0400
Could somebody forward this on to Brit scientist David Clarke because I’m pretty sure he missed the memo, lol…
commented 2015-07-14 20:18:53 -0400
Spot on! You can’t deny facts. It took 3days for England to realize the effects of Krakatoa. The Internet just helps us realize it sooner
commented 2015-07-14 19:34:03 -0400
I doubt that I will be here by 2030, but I am increasing the insulation in the walls of my house simply because the last two winters have been cold and very windy, and that has made heating a bit of a problem (electric furnace + wood stove). So, I am adjusting to conditions. If you think it is better to adjust for increased warming, by all means, but this has not been a warm summer here, and the past winter and spring were both cold, in the case of the winter, very cold. And yes, I know you will say that is weather. Call it whatever you like, I am insulting the walls.
commented 2015-07-14 19:08:45 -0400
“The coming Ice Age”, taught back in the 70s. I remember, even in elementary school, being shown pictures of glaciers in Banff and Jasper parks with increase marks per year. I remember being taught that it was all the pollution and particulate in the air that was reflecting the sunlight and keeping earth temperatures “low”. I remember the huge push to get Industry to clean up its emissions, and that even translated to vehicles. Anyone else remember the elimination of lead from gasoline and the introduction of the catalytic converter?

Wait a minute, now we’ve got a new problem — the ozone layer around the earth actually has a hole in it, one at each pole! How did that come about? (Dig, dig, dig…) Hey, it’s all the Freon (R12) that was released in to the atmosphere over the last 50 years, and those molecules are bouncing around the upper atmosphere and being degraded by radiation and destroying the ozone layer! Gotta prevent that — there’s gonna be too much radiation on the earth, and too many mutations…! So, new materials, new instruments, new laws, lots of cost…
…and nothing heard again for about 15 years. Hmmm…

Wait a minute, now we’ve got another problem — there’s too much CO2 in the atmosphere, turning the earth into a greenhouse! We’re warming up too fast! How did this happen? (Could it have had anything to do with the “cleanup” done in decades past, perhaps…?) We’ve got to cut back on our already-much-cleaner emissions!

…and on, and on, and on.

The earth gets its heat from the sun, period. More solar activity, more heat. Less solar activity, less heat. Period.
It was warmer 1000 years ago than it is now, and everybody survived. (And how did that happen? No petrocarbons, less population, no heavy industry, no cars… if it was warmer then, how did it get that way?)

Should we be efficient and as clean as economically possible with our resources? ABSOLUTELY!! Are we [mankind] the cause of all this crap that’s been happening in the last 100 years or so? Not solely. We contribute, yes, but we have ZERO influence on the sun.

Maybe IPCC should have taken more notice of solar activity in its “modelling”… or at least taken its modelling to the runways, where it could have been better appreciated…
commented 2015-07-14 18:55:10 -0400
“still can not get a 7 day forcast that is right.”
Robert, there’s a big difference between “weather” and "climate. Heisenberg confirmed that you could not, with certainty, simultaneously define the location and the velocity of an electron. But if it’s part of a car heading in your direction, you should probably get out of the way.
commented 2015-07-14 17:07:59 -0400
The Maunder Minimum isn’t normal fluctuation in weather patterns. It is caused from a stage of low flare activity, and less ultraviolet rays being emitted from the sun. It is something they can track quite well.
commented 2015-07-14 16:53:47 -0400
still can not get a 7 day forcast that is right. 20 years ago the elm[environmental lying movement] told us new york would be underwater[ha ha]. now we will get colder in 20 years. weather is always fun, unpredictable, and laughable.
commented 2015-07-14 16:22:20 -0400
I have been trying to make some sense of the hype over the past 5 years, and the more I delve, the more I understand that there is NO way that the science is done, or that there is a consensus, or that the data is all in. Only the Gores and the Suzuki’s and the paid political pawns keep regurgitating the fossil fuel myth, and expect us to swallow it. It has been so ingrained now that people do accept the myth as truth.

The more I find out the more I don’t know, but it seems very evident to me, that to say that Carbon dioxide (from any source), is all we need to know, is more than a little simplistic and God help us, we can’t be that simple.

The Maunder Minimum is pretty interesting stuff. It is a time of very low solar flare activity, so, much lower levels of ultraviolet light is emitted. Ozone is created by a mix of oxygen and high energy ultra violet light from the Sun. During Maunder Minimums’, less ozone is created and this affects planetary waves.

Something called The North Atlantic Oscillation,(NAO) is the balance between a permanent LOW near Greenland, and a permanent HIGH pressure system to its south. The affected planetary waves kick the NAO into a negative phase, where both systems are rendered weakened, and the usual paths of winter storms are then changed. Wrecking havoc in places where the extreme weather is considered unusual. We are not just talking about the usual fluctuations in weather patterns. We are talking major freeze. The last big one as Ezra states was 1645-1715. It has a lot more to do with Sunspots than any C02 from fossil fuel extraction.

I think we have a lot to prepare for, and wasting time and so much money on this politically driven agenda of the society control freaks is going to end up leaving us all out in the cold. Pun intended. I would say food sources will be challenged to say the least.

If anyone is interested this link is to a vid with John L. Casey, a NASA scientist
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQanWtkSDHE

This article explains more about the Maunder Minimum affect on the ozone and what it means to earth.
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php?id=7122
commented 2015-07-14 16:20:06 -0400
In regard to Galileo, much hyperbole and rancor is directed at the Catholic Church for no good reason. Had he kept his hypothesis about heliocentrism as a scientific proposal, the Pope wouldn’t have said anything. As a matter of fact, heliocentrism was taught in Roman seminaries long before Galileo’s telescopic observations. What got Galileo in trouble was (1) he proposed that certain Scriptural passages were wrong, or at least wrongly interpreted, and (2) he published a dialogue where he portrayed the Pope, who at that time considered Galileo to be a friend, as a, “Simpleton.” The first part was beyond his mandate, and the second was simply insulting on a personal level.

In fact, Galileo couldn’t even prove heliocrentism. It wasn’t his fault. The equipment to measure the polaxis shift wouldn’t be built for another century, but the fact remains that he couldn’t even prove his own hypothesis. Whatever else can be said about the Pope at the time, all the scientific measurements he had available to him at the time supported geocentrism, and Galileo made an enemy of the Pope for no good reason.

As for the Catholic Church’s position on heliocentrism, I can say this unequivocally: the Catholic Church did not then and does not now have a doctrine on the motion of the planets. What She does say is that, as the one true Church established by Jesus Christ, she does have the unique authority to interpret Scripture. The Pope fumbled his approach to Galileo’s Scriptural challenge; history shows that. Just because he managed his job poorly doesn’t mean his job shouldn’t exist.
commented 2015-07-14 16:19:04 -0400
It is obvious this “sun cooling problem” is the result of excessive polluting energy consumption here on earth.
Taxes must be increased to subsidize the construction of millions more “natural windmills” and all other sources of electricity must be immediately banned.
commented 2015-07-14 15:13:06 -0400
Being born in 1948 and getting a good education I have seen the LL ( loonie left ) go from Global ice age to Global warming to Climate change and now the LL are going back to Global ice age. The sky is falling says the LL but as I looked up into the sky last night the stars where just as I saw them when I was just a youngster. BUT there is one pollution I believe in, it’s Light pollution because from the city of Hamilton there were fewer stars than I had seen while I was in Rawdon. I wonder what happened to them did they just disappeared ?
commented 2015-07-14 14:52:29 -0400
WOW! Great work Ezra.
A hundred years from now, will historians write. These left wing environmentalists are
a) innocent, misinformed, ignorant people. Or
b) Greedy, treacherous, fear mongering people who attempted to profit at the expense of mankind. Or
c) They did commit crimes of perjury. But because THC levels of pot in this era was so high. They are not guilty for reasons of mental defect.

Alex Armutlu
commented 2015-07-14 14:18:29 -0400
I thought that last winter was unusually cold here in Toronto, part of Ontario Lake froze in some areas and the lake never freezes; it is always very cold but it does not freeze as far as I can remember. And the last 2 summers were not warm. So it make sense to me that we are a cooling off period even though we have enjoying very nice weather for the last week. We need our oil and gas and more so if we get an ice age! Al Gore is not even a scientist, he is just enjoying the big bucks he has made out of Global Warming.
commented 2015-07-14 11:47:49 -0400
And I thought that the first movement toward female emancipation in the 17th century was the result of the Protestant Reformation…but it was obviously well encouraged by the Maunder Minimum…the forced cooling of the Earth and therefore the cooling of male hostility toward female liberty in the 1600’s and 1700’s caused by the need to stay warm and cuddle up. God works in mysterious ways:)

With Western Canada covered with so much smoke this year, the new cooling might even start sooner. There are a few men and women here, in the Rebel audience, that would be helped by this cooling too…

Terry, don’t worry so much. It’s not our fault. Guilt manufacturers are everywhere and usually they are the culprits too…often they have many homes around the world…expensive vehicles and appliances…constant jet travel…etc. They have no trouble paying their electricity bills. Yeah they talk all the time too…hot air as well…I will not be moved…my insane hydro bill keeps me ‘holier’ and more uncomfortable than these.
commented 2015-07-14 11:47:24 -0400
what? the sun affects the earth temperatures? I am going to talk to someone about this !!
commented 2015-07-14 11:33:06 -0400
Man is now affecting the weather on the sun!
commented 2015-07-14 11:08:17 -0400
Here’s the final statement from the scientist whose research sparked this discussion:
“However, Zharkova ends with a word of warning: not about the cold but about humanity’s attitude toward the environment during the minimum. We must not ignore the effects of global warming and assume that it isn’t happening. “The Sun buys us time to stop these carbon emissions,” Zharkova says. The next minimum might give the Earth a chance to reduce adverse effects from global warming.
commented 2015-07-14 10:52:09 -0400
Glad scientists are catching up to me. As the arctic warms and the ocean is open there will be more precipitation on our arctic desert (yes it is a desert) as the snow builds it will become glaciers and we are back in the ice age. This was forecast during the cold war when Russia wanted to spread carbon black to open the ocean.
commented 2015-07-14 09:27:27 -0400
Oh boy this will trigger a resurgence in that damn fossil fuel stuff again, cause I don’t think wind and solar are going to work in an ice age, just when we were getting all green warm and fuzzy
commented 2015-07-14 09:03:43 -0400
The lefty’s just make up their crap (as a front for MOAR taxes and bigger GUM-MINT) by repeating it over and over again.

Nicely done Ezra – repeat the facts over and over again and watch what happens.
commented 2015-07-14 08:38:04 -0400
Here’s CTV’s article on it: http://www.ctvnews.ca/sci-tech/new-model-of-sun-s-cycles-predicts-mini-ice-age-in-2030s-1.2467463

Weren’t we warned about this back in the 70s? With all the “modelling” done by the various science people, whether it be this or “global warming/climate change”, I think these people might want to get on a runway, or join a modelling club and share their “research”. All of their [dire] predictions have proved false.
commented 2015-07-14 08:34:27 -0400
“I ignore most climatology studies. They’re too politicized to take seriously. "
However, here’s one that happens to support MY political position.
commented 2015-07-14 08:26:40 -0400
Some cannot stand the idea that they are insignificant on the stellar stage. Their need to make a difference can be hazardous to those around them, whether it’s witch burning, sacrifices for the volcano, or mandating that cheap food be outlawed (efficient growing, adding extra nutrients to food, converting foodstock into fuel). Lurching from crisis to crisis, imposing their help on others who just want to be left alone, zealots can take pride in warning everyone about the looming disaster, and then (seemingly paradoxically) take credit when the disaster doesn’t occur.

There’s a reason that the left likes to distort history and not teach it in a fun and coherent / tied together fashion. Those who know was has come before are less likely to fall for the same tricks. When I’m talking about the natural range of past climate changes (130m sea level change for instance) I’m usually greeted with blank stares. If it didn’t happen within the last 20 years, it didn’t happen.