Global Warming Taking a Vacation For a Decade or So

[Zoomie]

Ocean Cooling to Briefly Halt Global Warming, Researchers Say
By Jim Efstathiou Jr.
April 30 (Bloomberg) -- Parts of North America and Europe may cool naturally over the next decade, as shifting ocean currents temporarily blunt the global-warming effect caused by mankind, Germany's Leibniz Institute of Marine Sciences (http://www.ifm-geomar.de/index.php?L=1) said.
Average temperatures in areas such as California and France may drop over the next 10 years, influenced by colder flows in the North Atlantic (http://www.worldatlas.com/aatlas/infopage/oceansl.htm), said a report today by the institution based in Kiel, Germany. Temperatures worldwide may stabilize in the period.
The study was based on sea-surface temperatures of currents that move heat around the world, and vary from decade to decade. This regional cooling effect may temporarily neutralize the long- term warming phenomenon caused by heat-trapping greenhouse gases building up around the earth, said Richard Wood (http://search.bloomberg.com/search?q=Richard+Wood&site=wnews&client=wnews&proxystylesheet=wnews&output=xml_no_dtd&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&filter=p&getfields=wnnis&sort=date:D:S:d1), a research scientist at the Met Office Hadley Centre (http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/hadleycentre/), a U.K. provider of environmental and weather-related services.
``Those natural climate variations could be stronger than the global-warming trend over the next 10-year period,'' Wood said in an interview. ``Without knowing that, you might erroneously think there's no global warming going on.''
The Leibniz study, co-written by Noel Keenlyside (http://www.ifm-geomar.de/index.php?id=2070&L=1), a research scientist at the institute, will be published in the May 1 issue of the journal Nature (http://www.nature.com/nature/index.html).
``If we don't experience warming over the next 10 years, it doesn't mean that greenhouse-gas warming is not with us,'' Keenlyside said in an interview. ``There can be natural fluctuations that may mask climate change in the short term.''
CO2 Surge
Carbon dioxide, produced mainly from burning fossil fuels such as oil and natural gas, is the chief pollutant blamed for global warming. Since 1988, CO2 levels in the world's skies have increased by 9.8 percent, according to the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (http://www.noaa.gov/).
Scientists debate how much carbon can be pumped into the atmosphere before the effects of climate change, including droughts, floods and reduced fresh water supplies, become irreversible. For every 1 million molecules in the atmosphere, about 384 are carbon dioxide, according to NOAA.
Global temperatures can't rise by more than 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 Fahrenheit) without risking the worst effects of climate change, according to the European Union. A scenario to stay below that limit suggests that CO2 levels must be stabilized between 350 and to 400 parts per million.
Long-term climate changes in the North Atlantic region affect ``hurricane activity in the Atlantic, and surface temperature and rainfall variations over North America, Europe and northern Africa,'' according to the study.
`Cold Direction'
``Natural variations over the next 10 years might be heading in the cold direction,'' Wood said. ``If you run the model long enough, eventually global warming will win.''
The world will become at least 2.5 degrees Celsius warmer by 2100, compared with the pre-industrial period, Rajendra Pachauri (http://search.bloomberg.com/search?q=Rajendra+Pachauri&site=wnews&client=wnews&proxystylesheet=wnews&output=xml_no_dtd&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&filter=p&getfields=wnnis&sort=date:D:S:d1), chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, said in March.
``We thought a lot about the way to present this because we don't want it to be turned around in the wrong way,'' Keenlyside said. ``I hope it doesn't become a message of Exxon Mobil and other skeptics.''
Exxon Mobil Corp. spokesman Gantt Walton said managers of U.S. oil company ``take the issue of climate change seriously and the risks warrant action,'' in an interview today.
Source (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aU.evtnk6DPo)


And here I thought the mighty Gore said the oceans were going to rise and kill us all in the next decade or so! :cantbeli:

[T3ngu]

The issue is real, the extent detailed by Al Gore was obviously worst case, otherwise he would not have the attention he has.


``If we don't experience warming over the next 10 years, it doesn't mean that greenhouse-gas warming is not with us,'' Keenlyside said in an interview. ``There can be natural fluctuations that may mask climate change in the short term.''

[Zoomie]

The issue is real, the extent detailed by Al Gore was obviously worst case, otherwise he would not have the attention he has.
So explain to me that how they can easily explain away a decade long cold spell in weather as only "natural fluctuations", but it's heretical to even say that Global Warming, say might just be some "natural fluctuations" as well?

[T3ngu]

Ok, lets look at Australia.

I have historical records for where our farm is that showed, without fail, approximately 8-12 year flood cycles, even in drought years. Short term flooding.

We have not had a decent flood there since we have owned it, which is 15 years. The rainfall has slowly decreased over the last 15 years, and further, most Australian states have at some point experienced their highest ever temperatures in the last 12 months.

Lets look at this statement


Average temperatures in areas such as California and France may drop over the next 10 years, influenced by colder flows in the North Atlantic (http://www.worldatlas.com/aatlas/infopage/oceansl.htm), and
The study was based on sea-surface temperatures of currents that move heat around the world, and vary from decade to decade. This regional cooling effect may temporarily neutralize the long- term warming phenomenon caused by heat-trapping greenhouse gases building up around the earth, said Richard Wood (http://search.bloomberg.com/search?q=Richard+Wood&site=wnews&client=wnews&proxystylesheet=wnews&output=xml_no_dtd&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&filter=p&getfields=wnnis&sort=date:D:S:d1), a research scientist at the Met Office Hadley Centre (http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/hadleycentre/), a U.K. provider of environmental and weather-related services. The use of the term may is science for " we are publishing a paper and are not sure"

and finally


``Natural variations over the next 10 years might be heading in the cold direction,'' Wood said. ``If you run the model long enough, eventually global warming will win. This is a research paper based on computer modelling. I did my masters on meteorlogical type modelling and know that you can always twist the model to make things fit, if you are so inclined.

[Doggonit55]

I for one was always a sceptic. All those "expert scientists" (oh how many of them were NOT climatologists again?) jumped on the bandwagon because it was the way to get a few minutes of fame and possibly, depending on how well they did it, government funding for all sorts of vague research into averting this great dreadful climate catastrophe. In the '70s it was the ice age that would freeze over the planet by 2000, and now it's the big bad global warming that will wipe out the planet... okay.... whatever.

There is so much band-wagon jumping, hyped-up bulls**t about the whole thing. It's the activism flavour of the decade, I suppose.

People always love to get all busy and uppity about stuff they have very little control over. It helps them to forget all the stuff in their own backyard that they should be taking care of. Think local, not global, I say.

Furthermore, the audacity of some people is astonishing! They claim to be able to extrapolate viable scientific truths about our climate based on statistically insufficient amounts of data? We know stupidly little about our climate and how it works. People can be unbelievably arrogant at times to suggest otherwise. Climate cycles and all that are still mysteries.

I am in the inconclusive camp and desist from making a judgement except against those who have already made up their mind without putting any thought into it. Cynicism is king.

[Zoomie]

This is a research paper based on computer modelling. I did my masters on meteorlogical type modelling and know that you can always twist the model to make things fit, if you are so inclined.

So critics of Global Warming can't do that, but proponents of it can?

[T3ngu]

No, you are free to do whatever you want, but your article clearly shows that global warming will/is occuring.

Its an interesting exercise none the less.

[Chulo]

So critics of Global Warming can't do that, but proponents of it can?
Which one gets your more money?

[Doggonit55]

This is a research paper based on computer modelling. I did my masters on meteorlogical type modelling and know that you can always twist the model to make things fit, if you are so inclined.

Exactly. Statistical modelling of all sorts is part voodoo. You can twist it very easily, and might if you have a certain agenda.

On a different note, did anyone here read Michael Crichton's State of Fear? Interesting novel. Even if it's fiction, it's a worthwhile read in my opinion.

[Chulo]

On a different note, did anyone here read Michael Crichton's State of Fear? Interesting novel. Even if it's fiction, it's a worthwhile read in my opinion.
was goin to mention that- and he does cite sources for all the science

[Doggonit55]

Which one gets your more money?

Last I checked it was the people who swore up and down the row that Global Warming was the greatest danger humanity has ever faced...

Were I in a position to get some grants or the like for voicing such an opinion, I very well might. But no... that would be intellectual dishonesty. Sadly that's a dying virtue. There are lots of band-wagon hoppers, and very few true believers.

[T3ngu]

Sound like i might have to read a non miltary related book for once.



Were I in a position to get some grants or the like for voicing such an opinion, I very well might. But no... that would be intellectual dishonesty. Sadly that's a dying virtue. There are lots of band-wagon hoppers, and very few true believers.

Lets look at carbon trading in Australia. There are millionaires being made who set up companies yet have no inclination to do the work, they realise its a good market. They dont even pretend to understand.

[Doggonit55]

Carbon trading is the biggest pile of horse manure ever invented. Carbon credits? Please... the next student activist on campus urging me to reduce my carbon footprint gets my carbon rubber sole kicking his ass.

Speaking of which, I should invest in some of these bigger "climate change" companies and see if I can make a killing while they take governments and large corporations for a ride and shake them down for plenty of dough. Then I will dump my shares and watch these people getting the snot sued out of them when this whole global warming thing gets unravelled and all the non-sense gets debunked.

[justagoodolboy]

its almost as if the earth's global temperature has been naturally fluctuating since the beginning of time, but that's crazy talk.

[T3ngu]

Then I will dump my shares and watch these people getting the snot sued out of them when this whole global warming thing gets unravelled and all the non-sense gets debunked.

You really believe that? I don't. Its very un European Union of you.

**edit

let me rephrase that, i think certain elements of the global warming area may be debunked, but as a whole, i dont think it is something that will go away.

[Doggonit55]

No, it won't go away but the rabid activists will quiet down in a few years' time.

As far as European and all that goes, I can't really place myself. My parents are European, but I was born in Canada, lived in Europe, but 11 years in the US, and am currently in the UK, which, as many people will have you know, is not Europe... haha.

[T3ngu]

Only becuase of a little thing called the English Channel :).

[Dasein]

I wonder what effect a few years of cooling will have on crop yields? How will this impact global food supplies, and will it exacerbate emerging food crisis?

[Caraway]

I've got like 500 meters to my work. I drive in my car that 500 meters just to be an asshole for those Global Climate Change people. I work in a medium size newspaper in Finland.

[Doggonit55]

I hope you're not serious.

I once saw a lady in the US driver her car to the back of her apartment building to throw out the trash. I kid you not.

I advocate the caning of people for such flagrant laziness, stupidity, and wastefulness.

[=SiCaRiO=]

there is no such thing called global warming , it doesnt exist!!

period , finito , fin ,co2 is not bad for the planet , lest produce MORE !!!


:roll::roll:

[T3ngu]

Nevermind...............................

[Lambert58]

I burned a tire on earth day to honor the great Goracle!!

[Chulo]

there is no such thing called global warming , it doesnt exist!!

period , finito , fin ,co2 is not bad for the planet , lest produce MORE !!!


:roll::roll:
Sarcasm or not, and its statments like that shows the ignorance on both sides. Just because we are not the direct link to global weather change doenst me we dont have an obligation and responsibility to be good citizens.
I reject the idea that man is directly responsible for the weather change as Al Gore so dramatically states, but i advocate a responsible stewardship of the earth, its people and resources.

[Doggonit55]

Sarcasm or not, and its statments like that shows the ignorance on both sides. Just because we are not the direct link to global weather change doenst me we dont have an obligation and responsibility to be good citizens.
I reject the idea that man is directly responsible for the weather change as Al Gore so dramatically states, but i advocate a responsible stewardship of the earth, its people and resources.

I agree fully and wholeheartedly! There are too many idiots around who will do stuff just to spite everyone else. Like my neighbor who despite our pleas, cut down a perfectly healthy 120 year old tree. Why? Because she wanted more sun for her f***ing retarded lawn. Guess what? Her lawn hasn't improved at all. Stupid arrogant b***h. I can almost understand the anger of ecological activists at times.

[SoftLion]

Ecological Activism vs. Capitalism

Global warming! It's important! Now where in the hell can I fill my Phish bumper-stickered car up with a full tank of 'ol number 87 to live the life I am accustomed to?

[Mu-Meson]

Does this farce remind anyone of the Dead Parrot sketch by Monty Python.
Global warming isn't dead, tis resting. Pining for the ice caps.

[Dasein]

Does this farce remind anyone of the Dead Parrot sketch by Monty Python.
Global warming isn't dead, tis resting. Pining for the ice caps.

Not really - global warming itself is simply a red herring. The debate is about anthropogenic climate change, and that could mean increases or decreases in temperature.

[jokuvaan]

Last I read was that climate change has now exceeded even worst case scenario predicted many years ago.

[Mu-Meson]

It is no longer global warming but now climate change? So the goalposts have been moved again....... :roll: :roll: :roll:

[Doggonit55]

I for one am awaiting the coming ice age.

[T3ngu]

Mammoths ftw

[Buckeye67]

I'd like to see Canada buried underneath a mile-thick sheet of ice. That'd be small payback for getting their coins mixed into our change.

[Doggonit55]

I'd like to see Canada buried underneath a mile-thick sheet of ice. That'd be small payback for getting their coins mixed into our change.

Oh where's your dollar at right now? That's right... keep talking.

[Buckeye67]

I don't care about my dollar as long as I don't get your darn quarters and dimes back in my change.

[Doggonit55]

I don't care about my dollar as long as I don't get your darn quarters and dimes back in my change.

Haha! At least you don't have the monopoly money banknotes we have!

[bigvig]

I for one am awaiting the coming ice age.

Certainly. Eternal winter. I love the cold.

[tsuri]

People are just idiots about the term. Global warming does not mean that it gets constantly warmer all over the place until it looks like Spain everywhere.
It means that the rising temperatures of the planet will change the climate eventually. If it gets too warm in the wrong places, the gulf stream will die and then Europe turns into a freezing mess.
But that is to be expected. The earth is not an oven but has a complex climate system.

Please remember that there is no question that our climate is changing. The only question that is open for debate is this: Do we cause it do we not. So regardless of humans being at fault or not. If we suck at coping with the symptoms because dislike the explanation, we have to bear the consequences. Earth will work just fine. Humanity is what you have to worry about.

[T3ngu]

People are just idiots about the term. Global warming does not mean that it gets constantly warmer all over the place until it looks like Spain everywhere.
It means that the rising temperatures of the planet will change the climate eventually. If it gets too warm in the wrong places, the gulf stream will die and then Europe turns into a freezing mess.
But that is to be expected. The earth is not an oven but has a complex climate system.

Please remember that there is no question that our climate is changing. The only question that is open for debate is this: Do we cause it do we not. So regardless of humans being at fault or not. If we suck at coping with the symptoms because dislike the explanation, we have to bear the consequences. Earth will work just fine. Humanity is what you have to worry about.

Well put Tsuri

[loganinkosovo]

The issue is real, the extent detailed by Al Gore was obviously worst case, otherwise he would not have the attention he has.

Horsecrap. The real reasons for the "Man made" Global Warming Hoax....Power and Money. It's that simple. Just like the people who believe the garbage ALGore spews. The world temperture hasn't risen since 1998 and is in fact going down. In one hundred years it went up 1 degree and at the end of this year it will have gone down 2. It's a Bloody Hoax that is crumbling around their ears so stop drinking the Kool-aid and start thinking like a rational human being.

http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/mar2008/tc2008035_855093.htm

http://www.celsias.com/2008/03/14/tony-blair-to-be-britains-al-gore/

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/03/20/business/deal.php

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/f78fbec2-161b-11dd-880a-0000779fd2ac.html?nclick_check=1




http://newsbusters.org/blogs/lynn-davidson/2008/02/16/western-greenland-ice-growing-still-global-warming

http://www.globalwarminghoax.com/news.php

http://www.wnho.net/global_warming.htm

And for those who are too busy to read....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzSzItt6h-s

[T3ngu]

Horsecrap. The real reasons for the "Man made" Global Warming Hoax....Power and Money. It's that simple. Just like the people who believe the garbage ALGore spews. The world temperture hasn't risen since 1998 and is in fact going down. In one hundred years it went up 1 degree and at the end of this year it will have gone down 2. It's a Bloody Hoax that is crumbling around their ears so stop drinking the Kool-aid and start thinking like a rational human being.


So you say, none of these links are to reputable i.e. university, respected or government organisations.

Lets look at your Greenland example.

Here are some links to more reputable agencies using science rather than opinion.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/01/07/healthscience/ice.php
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4783199.stm
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn9717
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/09/060920-greenland-ice.html

In fact, the article you posted (http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/03/20/business/deal.php) even supports the notion of climate change. I read it twice and saw little to debunk anything.

I suppose one way to think about it is to go back to high school physics. If you put ice in hot water, there will be a change to achieve an equilibrium in temperature, which is a function of the degree of temperature for each material. The same could be said of climate change or whatever we are going to call it. If the earths atmosphere is not heating, but the ice is melting, surely there still is an issue.

[loganinkosovo]

So you say, none of these links are to reputable i.e. university, respected or government organisations.



Ah yes...the very people who's power and money rely on the Global Warming Hoax.

This Hoax proves the axiom "If you tell a Lie long enough and loud enough eventually people will start believing it."

Climates Change...hell, even Mars is going through a climate change as we speak, but the "Man Made" part is a complete fabrication from whole cloth.

If you want to save the environment, fine, but not at the cost of destroying every human advancement for the last 200 years.

That's just crass stupidity.

[Chulo]

So you say, none of these links are to reputable i.e. university, respected or government organisations.

Lets look at your Greenland example.

Here are some links to more reputable agencies using science rather than opinion.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/01/07/healthscience/ice.php
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4783199.stm
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn9717
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/09/060920-greenland-ice.html

In fact, the article you posted (http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/03/20/business/deal.php) even supports the notion of climate change. I read it twice and saw little to debunk anything.

I suppose one way to think about it is to go back to high school physics. If you put ice in hot water, there will be a change to achieve an equilibrium in temperature, which is a function of the degree of temperature for each material. The same could be said of climate change or whatever we are going to call it. If the earths atmosphere is not heating, but the ice is melting, surely there still is an issue.
i noticed none of them mentioned Solar contributions to the heating of earth.

[T3ngu]

Ah yes...the very people who's power and money rely on the Global Warming Hoax.

If you want to save the environment, fine, but not at the cost of destroying every human advancement for the last 200 years.

That's just crass stupidity.

Perhaps.

200 years ago we were in sailing ships and I don't think that anyone is pushing for you to start sailing, but , as Chulo said, living responsibly is critical.

I personally don't think man made climate change is a farbrication. The degree it is happening perhaps, but when you consider how much is let into the atmosphere it year, something has to be happening.

Take the air pollution in China, the atmosphere simply can't get rid of it. Theres a balance we need to achieve, not simply keep on our merry way.


i noticed none of them mentioned Solar contributions to the heating of earth.

I had better stop the sun too.

[Doggonit55]

Please remember that there is no question that our climate is changing.

Says you and what army?

Change is a relative term. Do you mean changing as part of the natural cycles (of which there are minor and major types) of the climate? Or changing extraordinarily as a result of human activity?

Fear is a weapon of mass destruction. It can get you lots of money though if you spread it well to all the right people.

[T3ngu]

But surely the potential risks outweigh the costs.

** edit

i had better start doing some work.

[Doggonit55]

But surely the potential risks outweigh the costs.

The risks of what? What costs?

[Power_serj]

And here I thought the mighty Gore said the oceans were going to rise and kill us all in the next decade or so! :cantbeli:

Don't listen this guy is a maniac. Would you rather listen to some crazed blogger, or the man who invented the internets? Gore is right! [/sarcasm]

[Doggonit55]

Wait didn't Al Gore invent the internet, AIDS, and Global Warming? That's the almighty trifecta right there.

[Chulo]

Originally Posted by chulo_allen http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?p=3217365#post3217365)
i noticed none of them mentioned Solar contributions to the heating of earth.




I had better stop the sun too.
There is more and more studies comming out that the Sun itself is playing a bigger role in climate change and things like sunspots have a direct effect on earth. I just saying some studies just choose to ignore some other major contributions and potential players in the climate change, and when the "natural" cant explain the rise, man is the fall guy that they use to make up for the windfall

[Dasein]

There is more and more studies comming out that the Sun itself is playing a bigger role in climate change and things like sunspots have a direct effect on earth. I just saying some studies just choose to ignore some other major contributions and potential players in the climate change, and when the "natural" cant explain the rise, man is the fall guy that they use to make up for the windfall

Solar activity is a well known factor in global climates, but since we've not seen any unusual solar activity in the past couple of decades, it wouldn't be much of an explanation for any recent changes.

[Chulo]

Solar activity is a well known factor in global climates, but since we've not seen any unusual solar activity in the past couple of decades, it wouldn't be much of an explanation for any recent changes.
But there has been unusual solar activity - just one example

Increased output from the Sun might be to blame for 10 to 30 percent of global warming that has been measured in the past 20 years, according to a new report.
http://www.livescience.com/environment/050930_sun_effect.html

plus an increase in sunspots and the size

[TheKiwi]

According to press releases over the past 10 years from my government National Institute for Water and Atmospherics (NIWA), (man made) climate change will result in one of the following:

Warmer and Drier Summers
Warmer and Wetter Summers
Cooler and Drier Summers'
Cooler and Wetter Summers
Warmer and Drier Winters
Warmer and Wetter Winters
Cooler and Drier Winters
Coolers and Wetter Winters

So there you are folks. It doesn't matter what the weather does, it's still climate change and it's still your fault for living.

[Lambert58]

Solar activity is a well known factor in global climates, but since we've not seen any unusual solar activity in the past couple of decades, it wouldn't be much of an explanation for any recent changes.

ORLY?

Where have all the sunspots gone? (http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2008/02/13/where-have-all-the-sunspots-gone/)

13 02 2008


I’m writing this after doing an exhaustive search to see what sort of solar activity has occurred lately, and I find there is little to report. With the exception of the briefly increased solar wind (http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/SWN/index.html) from a coronal hole, there is almost no significant solar activity.
The sun has gone quiet. Really quiet.
It is normal for our sun to have quiet periods between solar cycles, but we’ve seen months and months of next to nothing, and the start of Solar cycle 24 seems to have materialized (as first reported here (http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2008/01/04/solar-cycle-24-has-officially-started/)) then abruptly disappeared. The reverse polarity sunspot that signaled the start of cycle 24 on January 4th, dissolved within two days after that.

Of course we’ve known that the sunspot cycle has gone low, which is also to be expected for this period of the cycle.

But the real news is just how quiet the suns magnetic field has been in the past couple of years. From the data provided (http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/ftpdir/weekly/RecentIndices.txt) by NOAA’s Space Weather Prediction Center (SWPC) you can see just how little magnetic field activity there has been.

What is most interesting about the Geomagnetic Average Planetary Index graph above is what happened around October 2005. .
This looks much like a “step function” that I see on GISS surface temperature graphs when a station has been relocated to a cooler measurement environment. In the case of the sun, it appears this indicates that something abruptly “switched off” in the inner workings of the solar dynamo. Note that in the prior months, the magnetic index was ramping up a bit with more activity, then it simply dropped and stayed mostly flat.
We saw a single reversed polarity high latitude sunspot on January 4th, 2008, which would signal the start of a new cycle 24, which was originally predicted to have started last March and expected to peak in 2012. So far the sun doesn’t seem to have restarted its normal upwards climb.
If you have ever studied how the magnetic dynamo of the sun is so incredibly full of entropy, yet has cycles, you’ll understand how it can change states. The sun’s magnetic field is a like a series of twisted and looped rubber bands, mostly because the sun is a fluid gas, which rotates at different rates between the poles and the equator. Since the suns magnetic field is pulled along with the gas, all these twists, bumps, and burps occur in the process as the magnetic field lines get twisted like taffy. You can see more about it in the Babcock model (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babcock_Model).
I’ve alway’s likened a sunspot to what happens with a rubber band on a toy balsa wood plane. You keep twisting the propeller beyond the normal tightness to get that extra second of thrust and you see the rubber band start to pop out knots. Those knots are like sunspots bursting out of twisted magnetic field lines.
The Babcock model says that the differential rotation of the Sun winds up the magnetic fields of it’s layers during a solar cycle. The magnetic fields will then eventually tangle up to such a degree that they will eventually cause a magnetic break down and the fields will have to struggle to reorganize themselves by bursting up from the surface layers of the Sun. This will cause magnetic North-South pair boundaries (spots) in the photosphere trapping gaseous material that will cool slightly. Thus, when we see sunspots, we are seeing these areas of magnetic field breakdown.

Sunspots are cross connected eruptions of the magnetic field lines, shown in red above. Sometimes they break, spewing tremendous amounts of gas and particles into space. Solar flares and coronal mass ejections (CME’s) are some examples of this process. Sometimes they snap back (http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem/solar_snap_000622.html) like rubber bands. The number of sunspots at solar max is a direct indicator of the activity level of the solar dynamo.
Given the current quietness of the sun and it’s magnetic field, combined with the late start to cycle 24 with even possibly a false start, it appears that the sun has slowed it’s internal dynamo to a similar level such as was seen during the Dalton Minimum (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalton_Minimum). One of the things about the Dalton Minimum was that it started with a skipped solar cycle (http://spaceweb.oulu.fi/~kalevi/publications/non-refereed2/ESA_SP477_lostcycle.pdf), which also coincided with a very long solar cycle 4 from 1784-1799. The longer our current cycle 23 lasts before we see a true ramp up of cycle 24 (http://solarscience.auditblogs.com/2007/05/20/nasa-your-guess-is-as-good-as-ours/), the greater chance it seems then that cycle 24 will be a low one.
No wonder there is so much talk recently about global cooling. I certainly hope that’s wrong, because a Dalton type solar minimum would be very bad for our world economy and agriculture. NASA GISS published a release back in 2003 (http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/news/20030320/) that agrees with the commonly accepted idea that long period trends in solar activity do affect our climate by changing the Total Solar Irradiance (TSI).
Some say it is no coincidence that 2008 has seen a drop in global temperature as indicated by several respected temperature indexes (http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2008/02/11/giss-land-ocean-index-dives-in-jan08-matches-trends-for-uah-and-rss-satellite-data/) compared to 2007, and that our sun is also quiet and still not kick starting its internal magentic dynamo.