• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Sun-Caused Warming

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Sun-Caused Warming

By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Tuesday, September 08, 2009 4:20 PM PT

Climate Change: A team of international scientists has finally figured out why sunspots have a dramatic effect on the weather. It shows the folly of fearing the SUV while dismissing that thermonuclear furnace in the sky.

Mankind once worshiped the sun. Now the world studiously ignores it as nations prepare to hammer out a successor to the failed Kyoto Protocol, which expires in 2012, in Copenhagen in December. Something is indeed rotten in Denmark.

Our own government is committed to fighting climate change whether it be though Son of Kyoto or our own growth-capping, job-killing cap-and-trade legislation known as Waxman-Markey.

Despite the sun being the major source of all energy on earth, supporters of man-caused global warming have dismissed the sun's role in climate change. They say the historic 11-year solar cycle changes the amount of energy reaching the earth by about only 0.1% — not enough to account for temperature rises this century.

The Aug. 28 issue of the journal Science details how the scientific team led by the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), using a century's worth of data and three powerful computer models, figured out just how small changes in solar activity can trigger great changes in earth's climate.

The study found that chemicals in the stratosphere and sea surface temperatures during solar maximums act in a way that amplifies the sun's influence. The slight increase in solar energy in the peak production of sunspots is absorbed by stratospheric ozone, warming the air in the tropics where sunlight is most intense.

The additional energy also helps produce more ozone that absorbs even more solar energy. The increased sunlight causes a slight warming of ocean surface waters across the subtropical Pacific.

This stratospheric energy absorption and sea surface warming can intensify winds and rainfall, and ultimately influence global weather in ways that amplify the sun's influence.

"The sun, the stratosphere and the oceans are connected in ways that can influence such events as winter rainfall in North America," says study author Gerald Meehl. "Understanding the role of the solar cycle can provide added insight as scientists work toward predicting regional weather patterns for the next couple of decades."

The world has significantly cooled in the last decade, a period that corresponds to a decline and virtual halt in sunspot activity. Solar activity is in a valley right now, the deepest of the past century. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reports that in 2008 and 2009 the sun set Space Age records for low sunspot counts, weak solar wind and low solar radiance.

R. Timothy Patterson, professor of geology and director of the Ottawa-Carleton Geoscience Center of Canada's Carleton University, has said that "CO2 variations show little correlation with our planet's climate on long-, medium- and even short-time scales."

Rather, he says, "I and the first-class scientists I work with are consistently finding excellent correlations between the regular fluctuations of the sun and earthly climate. This is not surprising. The sun and the stars are the ultimate source of energy on this planet."

A Hoover Institution Study a few years back examined historical data and came to a similar conclusion. "The effects of solar activity and volcanoes are impossible to miss. Temperatures fluctuated exactly as expected, and the pattern was so clear that, statistically, the odds of the correlation existing by chance were less than one in 100," according to Hoover fellow Bruce Berkowitz.

Current solar inactivity is similar to what scientists call the Maunder Minimum, a period of solar inactivity from 1645 to 1715 that spawned what is known as the Little Ice Age. At Christmas, Londoners could ice skate on the frozen Thames and New Yorkers could walk over the Hudson from Manhattan to Staten Island.

The NCAR study shows how complicated atmospheric and climate science really is and how many variables must be factored in to have even a basic understanding of all the components that make up and influence earth's climate before the world commits economic suicide.

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=337303887307172
 

burnt

Well-known member
Well whoda thought - the sun is warming the globe . . . .

Gee, what will they discover next, it snows in Canada when the weather turns cold?
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Burnt, did you read much about Van Jones and how the Green Movement will spread the wealth to impoverished inner cities. He actually said Whites had poisoned the blacks intentionally.

Of course the labor movement is also involved in the obama plan.

So to expect them to look at the Science instead of creating another Social Justice program is slim to none.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
burnt said:
Yes master!! I remember it well! It was the required reading on the first day back to class.


You have learned well Grasshopper.

MV5BMTMyODMzMTg5OV5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTc.jpg
 

burnt

Well-known member
hypocritexposer said:
burnt said:
Yes master!! I remember it well! It was the required reading on the first day back to class.


You have learned well Grasshopper.

MV5BMTMyODMzMTg5OV5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTc.jpg


Thank you master. Your kindly spoken words alone shall sustain me for a week.

Is it okay to openly tell you in this forum that I almost screwed up and signed in as White Wing?


:lol: :lol: :lol:
:lol2: :lol2: :lol2:
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
burnt said:
hypocritexposer said:
burnt said:
Yes master!! I remember it well! It was the required reading on the first day back to class.


You have learned well Grasshopper.

MV5BMTMyODMzMTg5OV5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTc.jpg


Thank you master. Your kindly spoken words alone shall sustain me for a week.

Is it okay to openly tell you in this forum that I almost screwed up and signed in as White Wing?


:lol: :lol: :lol:
:lol2: :lol2: :lol2:

well now that Rush was so nice to share his log-in with all us conservatives, we can sign on as Whitewing as we please.

:D :D :D
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
reader (the Second) said:
So I should turn on every light in my house now I guess, huh hypo?

And run the furnace at 80 and the AC at 65?

That would be a hell of a lot smarter than bankrupting this country to tax CO2.
 

Tam

Well-known member
burnt said:
hypocritexposer said:
burnt said:
Yes master!! I remember it well! It was the required reading on the first day back to class.


You have learned well Grasshopper.

MV5BMTMyODMzMTg5OV5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTc.jpg


Thank you master. Your kindly spoken words alone shall sustain me for a week.

Is it okay to openly tell you in this forum that I almost screwed up and signed in as White Wing?


:lol: :lol: :lol:
:lol2: :lol2: :lol2:

Now I'm confused :? :( who is the master and who are us disciples to follow over the cliff to heaven on earth. :wink:
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
reader (the Second) said:
So I should turn on every light in my house now I guess, huh hypo?

And run the furnace at 80 and the AC at 65?

If you can afford it more power to you! You should do what ever is comfortable to you! Me or no one else should decide your comfort zone!
 

Tam

Well-known member
aplusmnt said:
reader (the Second) said:
So I should turn on every light in my house now I guess, huh hypo?

And run the furnace at 80 and the AC at 65?

If you can afford it more power to you! You should do what ever is comfortable to you! Me or no one else should decide your comfort zone!

Don't worry Aplusmnt with the smart grid Obama wants reader will not have control of the heat or AC in her home. It will be turned up and down at the whim of a government flunky. Who knows many that will be Van Jones new job. :wink:
He'll have the homes of minorities turned up and comfortable and those evil whites, that intentionally poison minorities, homes turned WAY DOWN to freeze them out to teach them who is in charge. :wink:
 

burnt

Well-known member
Tam said:
burnt said:
hypocritexposer said:
You have learned well Grasshopper.

MV5BMTMyODMzMTg5OV5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTc.jpg


Thank you master. Your kindly spoken words alone shall sustain me for a week.

Is it okay to openly tell you in this forum that I almost screwed up and signed in as White Wing?


:lol: :lol: :lol:
:lol2: :lol2: :lol2:

Now I'm confused :? :( who is the master and who are us disciples to follow over the cliff to heaven on earth. :wink:

Well it can get a little confusing, but hang in there.

This whole elitism and hierarchy thing can get a little murky for us peasant types but the main thing is that the superiors know what they know and as long as they know it, it really doesn't matter who is at the top.

After all, the purpose is really not to bring clarity, but to obfuscate in order to achieve the real agenda - pronouncing equality for all while astutely protecting one's own self-interests. (see illustration as in r2)

Case in point - if someone tells you to believe that climate change is a result of human activity, you had better believe it even if it means laying your rationality aside.

Indeed, you should freeze in your home in the winter and roast in it during the summer because it is for the greater good(aka, the elitist's benefit)!

Long live the proletariat!! They are the means by which the elite may live!
 

badaxemoo

Well-known member
burnt said:
Case in point - if someone tells you to believe that climate change is a result of human activity, you had better believe it even if it means laying your rationality aside.

If your rationality is based on that of the medieval peasant, then yes, you would probably have to put it aside to "believe" in global warming. But then again you would also probably believe that the Earth was flat and the Sun revolved around it.

In the intervening centuries, humans developed something called science.

Nowadays the rational person would probably tend to believe the overwhelming consensus of climatologists who believe that human activity is affecting the climate.

There are still a few flat-earthers that have miraculously survived the last half-millenium untouched by science. And oddly enough they have become very good at surfing the internet to find "proof" that things like evolution, global warming, and various other accepted scientific theories aren't true.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Have the scientists that you follow come up with an explaination on why the earth has cooled the last 10 years - when their predicitions called for an exponential increase in temperature?
 

badaxemoo

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
Have the scientists that you follow come up with an explaination on why the earth has cooled the last 10 years - when their predicitions called for an exponential increase in temperature?

First of all, I wouldn't get my scientific information from a business website or magazine. It can hardly be considered objective. Particularly one that cites the Hoover Institution.

Secondly, go the NCAR website.

And then tell me how the author of this trashy article came to this conclusion using their research.
 

burnt

Well-known member
badaxemoo said:
burnt said:
Case in point - if someone tells you to believe that climate change is a result of human activity, you had better believe it even if it means laying your rationality aside.

If your rationality is based on that of the medieval peasant, then yes, you would probably have to put it aside to "believe" in global warming. But then again you would also probably believe that the Earth was flat and the Sun revolved around it.

In the intervening centuries, humans developed something called science.

Nowadays the rational person would probably tend to believe the overwhelming consensus of climatologists who believe that human activity is affecting the climate.

There are still a few flat-earthers that have miraculously survived the last half-millenium untouched by science. And oddly enough they have become very good at surfing the internet to find "proof" that things like evolution, global warming, and various other accepted scientific theories aren't true.

Well badaxe, I could go and look at that trashy, as you called it, article and certainly find information that would support your chosen viewpoint.

But if I may, I would like to point out that you, too, likely surf that net and certain periodicals that you know will provide the information with which you can live most comfortably.

Don't give me that crap about objectivity, because there is really no such thing. The fact that we begin to research a specific topic indicates that we have an interest in it, thus immediately showing possession of a bias which will influence the direction of our search.

Of course, not all like to admit that they may be anything other than objective. That might just cast a reflection on their self-perceived superiority.

Objectivity!! What an oxymoron!

Kinda like a degree in liberal arts . . . .
 

backhoeboogie

Well-known member
hopalong said:
:clap: :clap: :clap:
Nicely said burnt

Yes but he should have included a FAQ Section for the libs. Things like "What is climate change, humans, human activity, rationality, Earth, Sun, global warming, objectivity, and liberal arts."

Otherwise replies just seem to go over their head.
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
badaxemoo said:
burnt said:
Case in point - if someone tells you to believe that climate change is a result of human activity, you had better believe it even if it means laying your rationality aside.

If your rationality is based on that of the medieval peasant, then yes, you would probably have to put it aside to "believe" in global warming. But then again you would also probably believe that the Earth was flat and the Sun revolved around it.

In the intervening centuries, humans developed something called science.

Nowadays the rational person would probably tend to believe the overwhelming consensus of climatologists who believe that human activity is affecting the climate.

There are still a few flat-earthers that have miraculously survived the last half-millenium untouched by science. And oddly enough they have become very good at surfing the internet to find "proof" that things like evolution, global warming, and various other accepted scientific theories aren't true.

Science seems to have a history of being wrong, at one time the flat earthers as you mention where the Scientist who ended up being wrong. While the Bible all along told us that the earth was a Circle.

I have no problem with Science when it is used in the means it should be, Science use to be you developed a theory and then tried to prove it wrong, if you could not prove it wrong then it was a fact. Now with so much grant money and business involved in Science it has turned into I will develop a theory and then try to prove it correct and disregard any evidence that proves my theory wrong.

A few examples:

Reporting stations of land temperatures over the last 50 years have changed drastically. Thousands of stations have been shut down and hundreds have been moved from pastures to places like Airports. This skews the way the numbers reflect in the averages. Weather balloon temperature reading does not show a warming.

Hurricanes were worse back before man can be blamed for Global Warming, even though Scientist try to use hurricane and weather ups and downs as proof of Global Warming. How can we trust them when they lie and exaggerate the current weather. The worst decades of hurricane activity happened a long time ago, I think even in the 1800's and I can prove this if you need the data?

Scientist point out the melting ice caps and glaciers etc.......But they do not mention those that are growing. If you name me a specific glacier or ice cap that is shrinking I will give you three that are growing, we can play that game as long as you want to!

Science is a Business now and all about the money. They play each side to get grant money. Once the discussion is over so is the Government money!
 
Top