More truth about global temp - it's the sun. Little Ice age headed our way?

[calfoxwc]

https://www.almanac.com/blog/astronomy/astronomy/solar-minimum-approaching-mini-ice-age?trk_msg=IFKRMKA04RH4LCKJS6UA5R4HHG&trk_contact=P08I8GEDGFU2L78K01F2G6F9FG&trk_sid=6527G7DG2H1FL7M4L0J7B01278&utm_source=Listrak&utm_medium=Email&utm_term=Solar+Minimum+Approaching+|+A+Mini+Ice+Age%3f+(image)&utm_campaign=Companion+Weekly&utm_content=WEEKLY

It's science - REAL SCIENCE, not the sissy liberal political/emotional kind.

[jbluhm86]

"...However, if we do have a “Maunder Minimum,” it would not be a return to the “Little Ice Age.” Solar radiation expert Judith Lean, PhD, of the Naval Research Laboratory points to global surface temperature about 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit, warmer now than at the time of the Maunder Minimum and says a return to a Maunder Minimum phenomenon would lead to a cooling by only one-tenth of a degree C or .18 degree F."

 

This literally counteracts what you're claiming, and it comes from the very article you posted. Why do you not bother to read your sources before you post them? The frequency at which you do this is started to lead me to believe you do this on purpose as some sort of weird attention grab

 

 

[calfoxwc]

oh, shut up, woodpecker's "Other Brother Darryl"  LOL

Of course I read the entire story. The author asks the question. The author is not Judith Lean, you fool.

If you quit playing with yourself long enough, and read who the author was, (it's at the bottom, FYI) you'd see:

About This Blog

Welcome to “This Week’s Amazing Sky,” the Almanac’s blog on stargazing and astronomy. Bob Berman, longtime and famous astronomer for The Old Farmer’s Almanac, will help bring alive the wonders of our universe. From the beautiful stars and planets to magical auroras and eclipses, he covers everything under the Sun (and Moon)! Bob, the world’s mostly widely read astronomer, also has a new weekly podcast, Astounding Universe! 

So, what we have, is a guy who quotes himself from years ago, and then ADMITS THEIR PROJECTIONS WERE WRONG.

  The cruz of the explanation involved SOLAR ACTIVITY. Now, I have been talking about SOLAR ACTIVITY for years.

Judith Lean says we are NOT headed for an ice age - I'm trusting she could be right.

But the AUTHOR (once again, you fool, is NOT JUDITH LEAN) admits the SOLAR ACTIVITY is at a profound low.

So, even EXPERTS can be wrong, even when they aren't fudging data for political reasons, Jblew.

How MUCH does the sun cause/not cause global warming/cooling?

I don't know. but the political hysteria over the liberal mmgw nonsense is just that.

Because the best genuine honest scientists on earth admit stuff like this:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/post/could-a-quiet-sun-cancel-global-warming/2013/02/28/156b9f3e-81c8-11e2-a350-49866afab584_blog.html?utm_term=.80e8c9b47507

"Every 11-year solar cycle is different, exhibiting stronger or weaker peaks and valleys. These variations have implications for climate and weather which researchers are trying to better understand. The general thinking is that less sunspot activity imparts a slight cooling effect on the climate but with significant regional differences.

The sinking number of sunspots (at the solar max) in recent decades has some solar scientists wondering: are we heading towards a state of solar quiescence not seen since the famed Maunder Minimum of the mid-1600s to the early 1700s? That historic low point in sunspot activity coincided with the heart of Little Ice Age which featured bitter cold winters in North America and Europe."

and

"

“Indeed, the sun could be on the threshold of a mini-Maunder event right now,” NASA said last month. “Ongoing Solar Cycle 24 is the weakest in more than 50 years. Moreover, there is (controversial) evidence of a long-term weakening trend in the magnetic field strength of sunspots.”

But Judith Lean, a climate and solar scientist at the Naval Research Laboratory, said if we’re headed towards a Maunder Minimum-type event, its arrival is hardly imminent.

“I doubt that we are on the threshold of a Maunder Minimum event right now (as in, the next decade),” Lean said in an email. “The current modern maximum has indeed likely peaked, but the growth in activity from the Maunder Minimum (1634-1715) to the modern maximum (1976-1996) took a few centuries. So if solar activity is indeed in decline it will, I suppose, take a few centuries to reach a Maunder Minimum type event.”

Lean stressed forecasts of the sun’s activity are fraught with uncertainty and in their infancy.

“I don’t know what the sun will do - no one does because forecasting future solar activity even one solar cycle ahead is not at all reliable,” Lean said. “You may recall that initial forecasts for solar cycle 24 (our current cycle) were that it would be stronger than cycle 23 (which peaked around 2000-2002) whereas we are now probably near the peak of cycle 24 and it is very modest - weaker than 3 prior cycles.”

[calfoxwc]

furthermore, from the same link:

While these scientists see just a minor impact on the average global temperature from a possible solar minimum, the effects on regional climate may be more profound, though incompletely understood.

A recent report from the National Research Council (NRC) “The Effects of Solar Variability on Earth’s Climate” finds small variations in solar output can have “major influence” on climate, particularly at the regional scale.

As an example of the sun’s possible effects on regional climate, consider the 2011 study in Nature Geoscience which found low solar activity is associated with the negative phase of the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO). A negative NAO often results in cold, snowy conditions in eastern North American and northern Europe in winter.

Related: Has the sun driven recent precipitation extremes in Northeast?

Scientists say more research is needed to understand the possible effects of the sun’s evolving behavior on climate.

“If the sun really is entering an unfamiliar phase of the solar cycle, then we must redouble our efforts to understand the sun-climate link,” said Lika Guhathakurta of NASA’s Living with a Star Program, which helped fund the NRC study.

[calfoxwc]

 so, JBLEWITAGAIN,

they don't know. The author's rightly present both sides of the question.

You picked one side and tried to be a smartass.

dumbass move, jblew.

bad, bad, bad.

 

[calfoxwc]

Therefore, in conclusion, jblewitagain,

we have the NRC and NASA talking about the question,

and Judith Lean, PHD, disagreeing that we are on the ice age side of the question.

Which, has been my primary point for years -

solar activity, lack thereof, and how much it affects our global climate.

Now, I've clearly shown that experts, the top scientists on the planet, don't know,

don't understand everything, and disagree.

Therefore, that makes mmgw a farce, a political ploy for

getting a hold of wealth, and sending it to poor countries.... per the UN..

and...

making crooks like shep's idol, al gore...

very, very wealthy.

 

[MLD Woody]

Yeah, NASA

https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

The current warming trend is of particular significance because most of it is extremely likely (greater than 95 percent probability) to be the result of human activity since the mid-20^th century and proceeding at a rate that is unprecedented over decades to millennia.¹

[calfoxwc]

 

[calfoxwc]

oopsies - woodypeckerhead UPDATE

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2015/05/19/updated-nasa-data-polar-ice-not-receding-after-all/#2288a9532892

Updated NASA Data: Global Warming Not Causing Any Polar Ice Retreat

that little woodpeckerhead is to be laughed at.

LOL LOL LOL

[calfoxwc]

https://principia-scientific.org/nasa-exposed-in-massive-new-climate-data-fraud/

NASA Exposed in ‘Massive’ New Climate Data Fraud

 

https://www.express.co.uk/news/science/622043/GLOBAL-WARMING-NASA-Antarctic-COOLING-six-years-Arctic-north-pole-climate-change

GLOBAL WARMING? NASA says Antarctic has been COOLING for past SIX years

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2010/03/30/nasa-data-worse-than-climategate-data.html

NASA Data Worse Than Climate-Gate Data, Space Agency Admits

[calfoxwc]

but wait, silly woodypeckerhead, THERE's MORE !

LOL

https://news.mongabay.com/2007/08/nasa-admits-to-error-in-global-warming-data/

NASA admits to error in global warming data

 

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/nature/nasa-finally-admit-its-going-to-get-colder/

NASA Finally Admits It’s Going to Get Colder

NASA Admits Antarctica Gaining Land Ice (But good news is bad news ...

https://www.corbettreport.com/nasa-admits-antarctica-gaining-land-ice-but-good-news...

 

Nov 4, 2015 - But not the other researchers whose $1.5 trillion climate change gravy train are threatened by a cooling off of global warming hysteria.

Climate change whistleblower alleges NOAA manipulated data to hide ...

https://www.washingtontimes.com/.../climate-change-whistleblower-alleges-noaa-mani...

 

Feb 5, 2017 - The climate change debate went nuclear Sunday over a whistleblower's explosive allegation that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric ...

[calfoxwc]

 I figured the stupid woodpecker would step in his own crap. LOL

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2915061/Nasa-climate-scientists-said-2014-warmest-year-record-38-sure-right.html

Nasa climate scientists: We said 2014 was the warmest year on record... but we're only 38% sure we were right 

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2915061/Nasa-climate-scientists-said-2014-warmest-year-record-38-sure-right.html#ixzz5GFEUjG4c
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

[TexasAg1969]

Which one wins, global warming or the way overdue ice age?

Maybe they just equal out. We'll be long gone before the question is answered.

[calfoxwc]

philosophically, I equate it to my

cancellation diet.

If I eat a half lb of chocolate covered peanuts, and then I eat a half lb of broccoli,

they cancel each other out. The gw will negate the ice age, the ice age will negate the gw..

we're good ! except we still have mosquitoes...and ticks...

and one woodpecker.

[TexasAg1969]

20 hours ago, calfoxwc said:

philosophically, I equate it to my

cancellation diet.

If I eat a half lb of chocolate covered peanuts, and then I eat a half lb of broccoli,

they cancel each other out. The gw will negate the ice age, the ice age will negate the gw..

we're good ! except we still have mosquitoes...and ticks...

and one woodpecker.

But we still get peanut M&M's plus a diet Coke. Works for me! (well with a bit of racquetball thrown in anyway).

[calfoxwc]

4 minutes ago, TexasAg1969 said:

But we still get peanut M&M's plus a diet Coke. Works for me and my Wonderful Cute Wife ! (well with a bit of racquetball thrown in anyway).

Oh, The Wonderful Wife and I have to have the peanut M&M's...but with diet Dr. Pepper Cherry. That stuff is pretty goood - and I wouldn't try it for a long time - it's diet, you know.

[jbluhm86]

Scientific American: Why Climate Skeptics are Wrong - Michael Shermer

[htownbrown]

4 hours ago, jbluhm86 said:

Scientific American: Why Climate Skeptics are Wrong - Michael Shermer

So the Mid Pliocene was 10C-20C higher than it is today in upper lattitudes while CO2 was nearly the same as it is now.  NASA has clearly stated they don't know why because current models can't duplicate it.  That's not to deny mmgw is happening, it's more about the idea there appears to be mitigating factors they don't know yet.  What makes this type of article incredibly misleading is one could simply say "I believe in mmgw, but don't think it's a huge driver of climatic change" and get grouped in the 97%.  So the question I have for you, is what exactly is the consensus about?  I suggest you step away from the elephant before attempting to answer that.

Here is NASA's response:

Final Comments

Simulating past warm climates and identifying model/data contrasts for periods such as the Pliocene provide a test of the sensitivity of our primary tool for study future climate change: global climate models. At present, our results do not support the suggestion that Pliocene warming was caused by carbon dioxide increase since such changes are not consistent with the SST distributions derived from deep sea cores. There is evidence that changes in ocean circulation and the amount of heat oceans transport may be one potential cause of the warming.

Still, investigators have found evidence that minor increases in CO₂ (up to 380 ppm) did occur in the Pliocene. This causes us to wonder whether it is possible that an, climate feedback, as of yet unknown, associated with small increases in CO₂, could lead to the larger changes seen in the ocean circulation? Certainly the evidence for higher levels of CO₂ and stronger thermohaline circulation challenges recent results from coupled ocean-atmosphere models, which suggest that thermohaline circulation weakens as global temperature rises. Perhaps the Pliocene warming is uncharacteristic of next century's expected warming, perhaps the causes are different but the effects will be similar, and perhaps the Pliocene is a warning that unkown factors still exist that could exacerbate or mitigate the CO₂ increase and global warming.

Successful comparisons, while increasing our confidence in the basic approach, probably occur coincidentally in some cases and such errors would be difficult to identify. Nevertheless, mismatches between data interpretations and model results offer undeniable evidence that either the model, data, or both are innacurrate for a specific region and climate variable. Understanding this allows us to focus resources and efforts on areas that are likely to afford the most gain. Moreover, subsequent iterations, based on new treatments of the data or GCM, test the veracity of previous conclusions.

The GISS Pliocene GCM simulation and the PRISM reconstructions are a first step in the interative process of data collection and analysis, model experimentation and analysis, and data/model comparison; the gridded, boundary condition data sets are continuously being refined, updated, and extended into areas with scarce data. Additional modeling and sensitivity experiments involving new data sets and updated GCM versions will soon begin. Close cooperation between modeling and data groups can achieve an overall better understanding of global climate models, data, data collection and simulation strategies, and the climate changes our society and planet could face relatively soon

 

 

[htownbrown]

Oh and don't forget to pick up a copy of Michael Shermer's new book: 

Heavens on Earth: The Scientific Search for the Afterlife, Immortality, and Utopia

[Clevfan4life]

On 5/24/2018 at 10:21 AM, calfoxwc said:

 

If I eat a half lb of chocolate covered peanuts, and then I eat a half lb of broccoli,

they cancel each other out. 

please tell me ur trolling and dont beleive on a metabolic level thats how nutrition works. 

[calfoxwc]

6 hours ago, Clevfan4life said:

please tell me ur trolling and dont beleive on a metabolic level thats how nutrition works. 

seriously? it's a joke. I've told it before in my real life. LIbs have no sense of humor at all.

Here is the jist of the whole mmgw fraud. Al Gore got filthy rich, the leftist list of millionaires go on.

We who know better, post our objection references, and those of you who drink the mmgw koolaid post yours.

There are scientists on both ends of the debate.

Only pro side scientists have been caught fudging stats to purposely show their fake intended message.

The pro side debate is tainted badly overall, given that some studies were fraudulent, like the tree ring scandal from many years ago.

https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/the-stunning-statistical-fraud-behind-the-global-warming-scare/

Per old sheply - the "debate was over". no, it was just getting started.

So, the whole crux of the mmgw stuff is this:

it has NOT BEEN PROVEN - IS NO FACT.

so why all the hysteria over wanting people to vote for the progressives/dems/leftists, and allow ourselves to be

taxed completely out the wazoo, give more and more and more money to ....poor countries...over "mmgw",

and give control over our cars, cows, farms, homes, our lives....over a controverial non-truth?

How about solyndra. A major investor in solyndra was...George Kaiser, a billionaire obamao fundraiser.

So obamao used OUR TAX DOLLARS to help it..but it still crashed.

The Week reported, "The family foundation of billionaire George Kaiser, an Obama fundraiser, is one of Solyndra's big investors. The GOP says that Team Obama interfered to speed up the loan approval, cutting short due diligence so that Vice President Joe Biden could announce the loan at the Sept. 4, 2009, groundbreaking of a new Solyndra factory being financed by that government cash."

Then there is george soros - the nutjob "dr evil" in real life...

who funded so much money to al gore to convince the masses to give him more and more power

over governments.

https://www.ff.org/soros-paid-al-gore-millions-to-push-aggressive-us-action-on-global-warming/

 

Us Real Americans will keep our campfires, and the rest of the marxist non-Americans in our country can go sniff a cow's backside,

and everybody inbetween should stop staggering around like zombies in a movie, and get on board with common sense once and for all.

 

 

[MLD Woody]

Investors is your new go to site, huh?

[calfoxwc]

can't refute, so you resort to being an asswhole woodpecker again, huh?

How many different sources have I used in this thread? 9 or 10?

[MLD Woody]

I've "refuted" you climate change nonsense literally dozens of times. There's no point in explaining why your biased, Cherry picking articles are biased and cherry picking. People with half a brain already know what's up. Your mind isnt changing. Ah posted the study that explains how your brain works. I'd be telling at a brick wall. 

 

 

Now I know you'll take this as a win and throw in some childish name calling. Go ahead. 

[calfoxwc]

you have never legitmately refuted diddley squat since you've been on this forum, woodpecker.

You present your side, which has serious scandal and fraud involved with it over time.... then you say

the other side is completely "refusted".

hahahaha. I laugh and sneeze in your direction.

AGAIN - there are two sides of this debate. That means talking about mmgw as FACT is FICTION.

and more and more over time, the truth shows through - mmgw is a political gambit by the UN and most prominent

liberals, for the U.S. to fork over their wealth so they can give it away (referring to the UN), and also within our own country,

to accrue political manipulation of the voting base, and extract money from every single individual, even to the point of complaining about cows farting, so they can fund their socialist dream state they promise to the poor dem voting block, which they are desperately trying to force to double in size by bringing in illegal s american "ringers", who will be completely dependent on the gov for their existence.

   sorry, mmgw is a fraud, we won the election, and you pay off your own dang student loan, woodpecker.

One day, if you actually DO refute skepticism about mmgw, we'll all know it. Ain't gonna happen, you never have,

have a nice day.

birdbrain.

[Clevfan4life]

 cal help me out with something. when someone posts nasa data u dont agree with, nasa is in the pockets of obama, soros and gore. but when they publish data that shows climate change is a more complicated nuanced issue but doesnt refute mans contribution....u pick and parse the data and triumphantly claim nasa is off the mmgw bandwagon, which they're not.

just let smart people studied in this field do their thing

[StinkHole]

15 hours ago, Clevfan4life said:

 cal help me out with something. when someone posts nasa data u dont agree with, nasa is in the pockets of obama, soros and gore. but when they publish data that shows climate change is a more complicated nuanced issue but doesnt refute mans contribution....u pick and parse the data and triumphantly claim nasa is off the mmgw bandwagon, which they're not.

just let smart people studied in this field do their thing

Stuart,

No one can refute the scant 120ppm of Co2 man has contributed since the industrial revolution. It's effect and the doomsday scenarios propagated by the left is what we question.

As you pointed out, and as the article suggests, it is a complicated issue and not completely understood.

 While these scientists see just a minor impact on the average global temperature from a possible solar minimum, the effects on regional climate may be more profound, though incompletely understood.

So we are supposed change our way of life over a hunch?

Riding on the back of mans contribution to Co2 levels is the progressive global redistribution of wealth scheme. It's glaringly obvious, and it has been stated as such.

Thanks to President Trump for withdrawing and saving the taxpayer $3 Trillion

[calfoxwc]

Another Climate Alarmist Admits Real Motive Behind Warming Scare ...

 

Mar 29, 2016 - Global warming alarmists have effectively sown fright but done a poor job ... We have been told now for almost three decades that man has to ... "We redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy," said Edenhofer. ... of U.N.'s Framework Convention on Climate Change, made a similar statement.

Missing: liberal

 

[calfoxwc]

from the link:

"Have doubts? Then listen to the words of former United Nations climate official Ottmar Edenhofer:

https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/another-climate-alarmist-admits-real-motive-behind-warming-scare/

"One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with the environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole," said Edenhofer, who co-chaired the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change working group on Mitigation of Climate Change from 2008 to 2015.

So what is the goal of environmental policy?

"We redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy," said Edenhofer.

For those who want to believe that maybe Edenhofer just misspoke and doesn't really mean that, consider that a little more than five years ago he also said that "the next world climate summit in Cancun is actually an economy summit during which the distribution of the world's resources will be negotiated."

[Clevfan4life]

ur linking to a forbidden sote which means its a malwaring spam lord. u nrver have anything from any reputable source so u go to tabloid malware ridden spam sites that link aliens with gw too. dont forget the aliens they're secretly terraforming us remember?