Climate change article by David Archibald

Solar Cycle 24: Implications for the United States
Archibald, David. 2008. Solar Cycle 24: Implications for the United States. International Conference on Climate Change March, 2008.
Full text [here]
Selected excerpts:
Do we live in a special time in which the laws of physics and nature are suspended? No, we do not. Can we expect relationships between the Sun’s activity and climate, that we can see in data going back several hundred years, to continue for at least another 20 years? With absolute certainty.
In this presentation, I will demonstrate that the Sun drives climate, and use that demonstrated relationship to predict the Earth’s climate to 2030. It is a prediction that differs from most in the public domain. It is a prediction of imminent cooling.
To put the solar – climate relationship in context, we will begin by looking at the recent temperature record, and then go further back in time. Then we will examine the role of the Sun in changing climate, and following that the contribution of anthropogenic warming from carbon dioxide.
I will show that increased atmospheric carbon dioxide is not even a little bit bad. It is wholly beneficial. The more carbon dioxide we can put into the atmosphere, the better the planet will be – for humans, and all other living things. …
To reconstruct climate prior to thermometer records, isotope ratios and tree ring widths are used. This graph shows the Medieval Warm Period and Little Ice Age. The peak of the Medieval Warm Period was 2° warmer than today and the Little Ice Age 2° colder at its worst. The total range is 4° centigrade. The warming over the 20th century was 0.6 degrees by comparison. This recent warming has melted ice on some high passes in the Swiss Alps, uncovering artifacts from the Medieval Warm Period and the prior Roman Warm Period. …
It was warmer again not long after the last ice age ended. Sea level was 2 metres than it is today. Since the Holocene Optimum about eight thousand years ago, we been in long term temperature decline at about 0.25 degrees per thousand years.
When I asked at the beginning of this presentation if we lived in a special time, well that is true in relation to the last three million years. The special time we live in is called an interglacial. Normally, and that is 90% of the time, the spot I am standing on is covered by several thousand feet of ice. Relative to the last four interglacials, we may be somewhere near the end of the current interglacial. The end of the Holocene will be a brutal time for humanity. …
The Holocene, the period we are in now, is tracking along with three of the four previous interglacials. Of those three, if the Holocene ends up being like the Eemian, then we may have up to 3,000 years of Little Ice Age-like conditions before we plunge into the next glacial period. If not, then the plunge could start any time now. …The evidence from the Hanover solar cycle length to temperature relationship, and that of the other cities in this presentation, is incontrovertible. There will be a significant cooling very soon.
Our generation has known a warm, giving Sun, but the next generation will suffer a Sun that is less giving, and the Earth will be less fruitful. …
The big consequence of this is that it will shrink the growing season. The 2.2 degree decline I am predicting will take two weeks off the growing season at both ends. Next decade will not be a good time to be a Canadian wheat farmer. For farmers further south, farm production will decline but that production will be worth a considerable amount more.
“The surprising result of these long-range predictions is a rapid decline in solar activity, starting with cycle #24. If this trend continues, we may see the Sun heading towards a “Maunder”type of solar activity minimum -an extensive period of reduced levels of solar activity.” — K.H.Schattenand W.K.Tobiska, 34th Solar Physics Division Meeting, June 2003, American Astronomical Society…
Can global warming from increased atmospheric carbon dioxide save us from a collapse in mid-latitude agricultural production? Not at all. …
In a world of higher atmospheric carbon dioxide, crops will use less water per unit of carbon dioxide uptake, and thus the productivity of semi-arid lands will increase the most.
It’s not all good news. We will need this increase in agricultural productivity to offset the colder weather coming.
AGW Proponents are Exactly Wrong
1.The Earth is getting colder and this will accelerate.
2.Carbon dioxide has a minuscule warming effect.
3.Increased atmospheric carbon dioxide will increase agricultural productivity.
4.The ideal atmospheric carbon dioxide level is a minimum of 1,000 ppm
What I have shown in this presentation is that carbon dioxide is largely irrelevant to the Earth’s climate. The carbon dioxide that Mankind will put into the atmosphere over the next few hundred years will offset a couple of millenia of post-Holocene Optimum cooling before we plunge into the next ice age. There are no deleterious consequences of higher atmospheric carbon dioxide levels. Higher atmospheric carbon dioxide levels are wholly beneficial.
Implications for the United States
1.The climate-driven reduction in agricultural production should be planned for.
2.Coal-fired power generation should be increased.
3.Coal to liquid fuels capacity should be installed.
Stopping coal-fired power generation due to carbon dioxide emissions is exactly wrong in science. The more carbon dioxide you put into the atmosphere, the more you are helping all living things on the planet and of course that makes you a better person.