Steve M.
Jedi Master
Over the last few days I've been trying to make sense of the climate scandal that is being propagated globally. I recently watched Global Warming the Truth http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBijSd9hipU , which is a 9-10 part series(?). It was quite interesting. Anyhow I've accumulated some facts/links and bs while trying to research this stuff and wanted to share some opinions, since real facts about it are hard to come by.
http://www.rightsidenews.com/index2.php?option=com_content&do_pdf=1&id=1848
Whats up with the sun? Since 1913(?), well that's not what these guys are saying.
http://www.solarcycle24.com/ And they have charts that prove the year sept, Nov and Dec. 97 and Feb-Sept. 98 were all spotless months.
(see Spotless Days vs Cycle 23 minimum under 'sun spots' on the 'trend charts')
So what are these guys saying?
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2008/30sep_blankyear.htm
What's going on in 2009? I can't seem to find any data on sunspots! (From http://www.solarcycle24.com/ click USAF/NOAA Solar Report)
So I'm confused and looked further for sunspots.
http://www.spaceweather.com/glossary/sunspotplotter.htm
Here I find that If I were born Jan. 1 2004 (set in the java window) that we're on a major sunspot decline. Under sunspots these guys http://www.solarcycle24.com/ sure are predicting a trend toward increased solar activity, but what if they're wrong?
On a side note, a thing I'm starting to understand is, is that global warming is caused by increased solar activity with co2 level increasing as a mechanical response to rising temperatures, not that temperatures increase as a result of increased co2. Now that sun spots are decreasing I think there will be a decrease in co2 (green house gases, which include H2o) since the earths overall temperature year after year has been declining for the last decade or so.
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/img/climate/research/2008/ann/global-jan-nov-error-bar-pg.gif the image was linked from this article here: http://www.businessandmedia.org/articles/2009/20090114065138.aspx Article Titled "The Ice Age Cometh: Experts Warn of Global Cooling" - Where Lou Dobbs interviewed a scientist. When mention was made to a certain groups data set: .
In all of this, the only, well outside of SOTT's, ..the only up-to-date realistic article(s) that I could find was this article: http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NTlhOTNiOWFlMmMzNmJkOWM3ZTk5NWJkNTU2Nzk5NWI=
where the guy gave real physical data over summer 09 temps:
At the bottom of the article (page 1) the guy has a chart.. and wouldn't you know it, there is a reference in the chart to volcanoes. From what I understand: Volcanoes pump out huge amounts of Co2, compared to humans, though nothing compared to the oceans. So what did the volcanoes do in the 80's and 90's? Caused global temperatures to drop!
Then of course this morning I woke up to this: UN: 2000-2009 likely warmest decade on record
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091208/ap_on_sc/climate
It's not too difficult to discern the reality of the situation, but it is difficult to come up with factual charts. For example smoke stacks aren't measuring exact amounts so the climate science appears to be mostly guesswork. Not that there, IMO, is an exact climate science. It's the haves just forcing new taxes on the have-nots.
Not that it means much but last year where I live it snowed in late May early June. In all, I'm not trying to make much from all of this, though I don't believe in global warming at all. It is however difficult to navigate between the BS (media blitzkrieg) and the work a few people are sticking their necks out. Apologies if this belongs in baked noodles, it's certainly baking mine trying to wade through the disinfo and things.
http://www.rightsidenews.com/index2.php?option=com_content&do_pdf=1&id=1848
Sun poised to make history with first spotless month since 1913
August 30, 2008
Watts Up With That
Many people that have an interest in the interaction between the Sun and Earth have been keeping a watchful eye on several metrics of solar activity recently. The most popular of course has been sunspot watching.
The sun has been particularly quiet in the last several months, so quiet in fact that Australia's space weather agency recently revised their solar cycle 24 forecast, pushing the expected date for a ramping up of cycle 24 sunspots into the future by six months.
On August 31st, at 23:59 UTC, just a little over 24 hours from now, we are very likely to make a bit of history. It looks like we will have gone an entire calendar month without a sunspot. According to data from NOAA's National Geophysical Data Center, the last time that happened was in June of 1913. May of 1913 was also spotless.
Whats up with the sun? Since 1913(?), well that's not what these guys are saying.
http://www.solarcycle24.com/ And they have charts that prove the year sept, Nov and Dec. 97 and Feb-Sept. 98 were all spotless months.
(see Spotless Days vs Cycle 23 minimum under 'sun spots' on the 'trend charts')
So what are these guys saying?
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2008/30sep_blankyear.htm
Sept. 30, 2008: Astronomers who count sunspots have announced that 2008 is now the "blankest year" of the Space Age.
What's going on in 2009? I can't seem to find any data on sunspots! (From http://www.solarcycle24.com/ click USAF/NOAA Solar Report)
Joint USAF/NOAA Report of Solar and Geophysical Activity
SDF Number 341 Issued at 2200Z on 07 Dec 2009
IA. Analysis of Solar Active Regions and Activity from 06/2100Z
to 07/2100Z: Solar activity was very low. No flares occurred during
the past 24 hours. The solar disk was void of sunspots.
IB. Solar Activity Forecast: Solar activity is expected to be very
low.
So I'm confused and looked further for sunspots.
http://www.spaceweather.com/glossary/sunspotplotter.htm
Here I find that If I were born Jan. 1 2004 (set in the java window) that we're on a major sunspot decline. Under sunspots these guys http://www.solarcycle24.com/ sure are predicting a trend toward increased solar activity, but what if they're wrong?
On a side note, a thing I'm starting to understand is, is that global warming is caused by increased solar activity with co2 level increasing as a mechanical response to rising temperatures, not that temperatures increase as a result of increased co2. Now that sun spots are decreasing I think there will be a decrease in co2 (green house gases, which include H2o) since the earths overall temperature year after year has been declining for the last decade or so.
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/img/climate/research/2008/ann/global-jan-nov-error-bar-pg.gif the image was linked from this article here: http://www.businessandmedia.org/articles/2009/20090114065138.aspx Article Titled "The Ice Age Cometh: Experts Warn of Global Cooling" - Where Lou Dobbs interviewed a scientist. When mention was made to a certain groups data set: .
..Assessment Project (ICECAP) questioned that data by comparing it to more modern reliable satellite data, when ask if he “quibbled” with the NOAA data’s representation.
“Yes, I do,” D’Aleo replied. “In fact, if you look at the satellite data, which is the most reliable data, the best coverage of the globe – 2008 was the 14th coldest in 30 years. That doesn’t jibe with the tenth warmest in 159 years in the Hadley data set or 113 or 114 years in the NOAA set.”
In all of this, the only, well outside of SOTT's, ..the only up-to-date realistic article(s) that I could find was this article: http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NTlhOTNiOWFlMmMzNmJkOWM3ZTk5NWJkNTU2Nzk5NWI=
where the guy gave real physical data over summer 09 temps:
"June in Manhattan averaged 67.5 degrees Fahrenheit, 3.7 degrees below normal — the coldest average since 1958. The National Weather Service stated on July 1: “The last time that Central Park hit 85 in May . . . but not in June was back in 1903.”
In Phoenix, June’s high temperatures were below 100 degrees for 15 days straight, the first such June since 1913. In California’s desert, Yucca Valley’s June average was 83.5, 8.5 degrees below normal. Not far away, downtown Los Angeles averaged 74.5 degrees, five below normal.
..
At the bottom of the article (page 1) the guy has a chart.. and wouldn't you know it, there is a reference in the chart to volcanoes. From what I understand: Volcanoes pump out huge amounts of Co2, compared to humans, though nothing compared to the oceans. So what did the volcanoes do in the 80's and 90's? Caused global temperatures to drop!
Then of course this morning I woke up to this: UN: 2000-2009 likely warmest decade on record
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091208/ap_on_sc/climate
It's not too difficult to discern the reality of the situation, but it is difficult to come up with factual charts. For example smoke stacks aren't measuring exact amounts so the climate science appears to be mostly guesswork. Not that there, IMO, is an exact climate science. It's the haves just forcing new taxes on the have-nots.
Not that it means much but last year where I live it snowed in late May early June. In all, I'm not trying to make much from all of this, though I don't believe in global warming at all. It is however difficult to navigate between the BS (media blitzkrieg) and the work a few people are sticking their necks out. Apologies if this belongs in baked noodles, it's certainly baking mine trying to wade through the disinfo and things.