Re: [asa] A simple example

From: Rich Blinne <>
Date: Thu Dec 17 2009 - 11:22:31 EST

Even though resonance is theoretically possible before you go there you need
to answer the question of why wasn't there resonance for thousands of years
and suddenly in the mid-20th Century things just changed? Be10 proxy studies
have shown that solar irradiance AND the climate have responded in sync with
sunspots. The problem is that AGW has swamped this effect. Prior to the
mid-20th Century knowing the solar irradiance from Be10 and when there were
volcanic eruptions the proxy record can be explained by mostly these two
effects using computer model hindcasts. Furthermore, the forcing was not
resonant. It's was direct with a relatively short delay. In short, you
didn't need to model any resonance to explain the climate prior to the
Industrial Era. After the mid-20th Century there was a large divergence,
though, and the climate could not be explained by these natural forces

The last few years the Sun has given us an excellent controlled experiment.
We have been stuck for several years with almost no sunspots and as late as
this year it looked like we might have a repeat Maunder Minimum. Thus, there
was good reason to believe that this would have a relative cooling effect on
the climate. So we have AGW and the Sun running against each other and we
can then see without the need of relying on computer models which is the
larger effect. The results of this "experiment"? The current decade is on
average 0.18 degrees C warmer than the 90s.

Rich Blinne
Member ASA

On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 8:38 AM, William Hamilton <> wrote:

> I have browsed through references supplied by Rich and Randy, and I will
> read them in more detail in the next few days. However, let me state a
> suspicion I have had for some time: I'm not convinced anyone (in the
> conventional climate change community) is considering the potential of
> resonance to cause temperature swings to grow with time -- even with very
> small excitation. I have put together a simple example using Mathematica,
> and the results are posted on my blog: It's
> probably the simplest possible example, and I claim no resemblance to the
> earth/sun dynamics. However, it does demonstrate that with an excitation
> varying by 0.1 percent of the base value, there is no limit to the size of
> the response that can be realized. Although it's very crude (the efforts of
> a novice at Mathematica) I will gladly email my Mathematica file to anyone
> who asks.
> Let me take this opportunity to add my voice to Glenn's: We need a forum in
> which we can post charts and graphs.
> --
> William E (Bill) Hamilton Jr., Ph.D.
> Member American Scientific Affiliation
> Austin, TX
> 248 821 8156

To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu Dec 17 11:23:05 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Dec 17 2009 - 11:23:05 EST