Spendulus
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 2898
Merit: 1386
|
 |
June 24, 2015, 07:06:36 PM |
|
This data obsoletes all "solar activity, natural causes" crap posted above, enjoy  If you believe your own opinion more than data, then you must believe in unicorns too and have a massive ego problem ... Says someone using [ size=20pt ] font to prove how big my ego is? 15pt is more than enough dude... Keep quoting that link with gif animation answers, it makes deniers look more stupid Sure... When I see stuff like this I really wonder who, exactly, believes that temperature readings from 1880 are comparable to those of today. They likely picked the more pleasant times of the day to go read the thermometers. Oh, wait, now I see the light. It's the ADJUSTOR department of the factory of REGULATED science. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Spendulus
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2898
Merit: 1386
|
|
June 24, 2015, 07:22:58 PM |
|
Please report back when they turn off the heater and air conditioner in that court room to do their part. ................ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
galdur
|
|
June 25, 2015, 10:06:14 AM |
|
Scientists admit we may be headed into a Little Ice Age, but keep on blathering about “global warming”JUNE 24, 2015 They dismiss their findings by saying the ice age will merely be “regional” (as if full-fledged ice ages aren’t also “regional.”) A rapid decline in the Sun’s activity is making it increasingly likely that the world is headed into a “grand solar minimum,” says a spokesman for the British Met Office. The last grand solar minimum – the Maunder Minimum – is thought to have contributed to what is known as the “Little Ice Age” during the 17th and 18th Centuries. The Maunder Minimum was a time of almost no sunspots from 1645-1715. It was a time of cooler winters in eastern North America and Europe when the Thames froze so solidly that horse-driven carriages were able to cross the river on the ice. There is about a one-in-five chance of the Sun entering the same kind of cooling phase within the next 40 years, a new study shows. “During the Maunder Minimum period there were runs of cold winters including 1684 which was the coldest winter recorded,” says Met Office long-range expert professor Adam Scaife. In fact, “there are signs that solar activity has been dropping over the past decade. ”“Solar activity levels, or solar flux, are currently estimated to be at their lowest for the last 100 years,” agreed James Madden, forecaster for Exacta Weather. Not enough to save the world from global warmingHowever, scientists warn that this will not be enough to save the world from global warming.“ Even if you do go into Maunder minimum conditions it’s not going to combat global warming, the sun’s not going to save us,” said Sarah Ineson, Met Office scientist and lead author of the study. A grand solar minimum is more likely to affect certain regional areas, but not on a worldwide scale, said Ineson. “ It could have impacts at a regional level that should be factored in to decisions about adapting to climate change.” Northern Europe and the eastern United States would experience much stronger cooling than other areas because less ultraviolet solar energy at the top of the stratosphere would cause a chain reaction which would affect the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO), the study found. The NAO plays a key role in influencing winter weather on both sides of the Atlantic. A changing NAO would also take storms in a more southerly direction, bringing more rainfall to southern Europe and slightly lessening the drying trend the region is (supposedly) set to experience because of climate change. Eastern North America and Europe are merely “regional?” I think saying that a Little Ice Age would merely be “regional” is a mealy-mouthed way of trying to hide reality. Full-fledged ice ages are also “regional.” Consider. During the last ice age, even though much of Canada was buried beneath one to two miles of ice, temperatures in much of the rest of the world barely changed. The tropics and subtropics were only four degrees colder, while the equatorial rainforest belt remained much the same as today. By the time it stopped, the ice had claimed almost three times as much land as today: more than 17 million square miles. How much land would need to be covered by ice, I wonder, before these so-called scientists could bring themselves to admit that an ice age affects the entire world? It may be “regional,” but when most of the wheat-growing regions of the world are covered by ice, it will be catastrophic. See entire articles: http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/jun/23/weak-sun-could-offset-some-global-warmi ng-europe-us-study http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/natural-cooling-of-the-sun-will-not-be-enough-to-save-earth-from-global-warming-warn-scientists-10340067.htmlhttp://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/uk-weather-britain-facing-mini-5933890http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3136780/You-need-wrap-UK-set-plunge-mini-ice-age-Met-Office-warns-one-five-chance-temperatures-drop-leaves-seen-17th-century.htmlhttp://www.express.co.uk/news/nature/586404/Britain-freezing-winters-slump-solar-activity
|
|
|
|
|
BillyBones
|
|
June 25, 2015, 10:41:31 AM |
|
Science can only predict the outcome of any event, but not with 100% accuracy.
I do not think anyone will know for sure what will happen tomorrow let alone the temperature of earth some years down the road.
Science can predict, I agree, but it said the truth and only purpose to save the humanity from scariest climate changes which will leads to global warming, due to that, there is a decline in Arctic sea ice, both in extent and thickness. Satellite observations show that Arctic sea ice is now declining at a rate of 13.3 percent per decade, relative to the 1981 to 2010 average. |
|
|
|
|
Wilikon (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon
|
|
June 25, 2015, 01:02:53 PM |
|
Science can only predict the outcome of any event, but not with 100% accuracy.
I do not think anyone will know for sure what will happen tomorrow let alone the temperature of earth some years down the road.
Science can predict, I agree, but it said the truth and only purpose to save the humanity from scariest climate changes which will leads to global warming, due to that, there is a decline in Arctic sea ice, both in extent and thickness. Satellite observations show that Arctic sea ice is now declining at a rate of 13.3 percent per decade, relative to the 1981 to 2010 average. Let me help you with data and other boring graphs regarding your point... You could also provide a link obviously. Links are always welcome. Personal opinions are also welcome, but with less hmm... value. You are also free to not click on the link and keep your faith... http://wattsupwiththat.com/reference-pages/sea-ice-page/This is what it feels like not to be banned, based on your respectful conviction, on a forum or thread... |
|
|
|
|
Wilikon (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon
|
|
June 25, 2015, 01:29:40 PM |
|
Obama Administration Official: Climate Change Will Kill Workers (VIDEO)
|
|
|
|
|
|
ridery99
|
|
June 25, 2015, 01:36:53 PM |
|
This data obsoletes all "solar activity, natural causes" crap posted above, enjoy If you believe your own opinion more than data, then you must believe in unicorns too and have a massive ego problem ... Says someone using [ size=20pt ] font to prove how big my ego is? 15pt is more than enough dude... Keep quoting that link with gif animation answers, it makes deniers look more stupid Sure... When I see stuff like this I really wonder who, exactly, believes that temperature readings from 1880 are comparable to those of today. They likely picked the more pleasant times of the day to go read the thermometers. Oh, wait, now I see the light. It's the ADJUSTOR department of the factory of REGULATED science. I see To you data is just a matter of faith. You believe in things, I trust in scientific method. |
|
|
|
|
|
ridery99
|
|
June 25, 2015, 01:43:06 PM |
|
and your own opinion and "gut feeling" based on your worldview is more legitimate than data produced by the advanced scientific community. |
|
|
|
|
Wilikon (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon
|
|
June 25, 2015, 02:42:33 PM |
|
This data obsoletes all "solar activity, natural causes" crap posted above, enjoy If you believe your own opinion more than data, then you must believe in unicorns too and have a massive ego problem ... Says someone using [ size=20pt ] font to prove how big my ego is? 15pt is more than enough dude... Keep quoting that link with gif animation answers, it makes deniers look more stupid Sure... When I see stuff like this I really wonder who, exactly, believes that temperature readings from 1880 are comparable to those of today. They likely picked the more pleasant times of the day to go read the thermometers. Oh, wait, now I see the light. It's the ADJUSTOR department of the factory of REGULATED science. I see To you data is just a matter of faith. You believe in things, I trust in scientific method. The catholic church is well known for being the most trusted body of science facts and they agree with you. I will pray for your soul my child so you can see the light of the carbon tax to keep the poor in eternal serfdom... What am I saying? I am supposed to be a denier of the faith of al gore... Never mind that. |
|
|
|
|
|
ridery99
|
|
June 25, 2015, 03:01:30 PM |
|
This data obsoletes all "solar activity, natural causes" crap posted above, enjoy If you believe your own opinion more than data, then you must believe in unicorns too and have a massive ego problem ... Says someone using [ size=20pt ] font to prove how big my ego is? 15pt is more than enough dude... Keep quoting that link with gif animation answers, it makes deniers look more stupid Sure... When I see stuff like this I really wonder who, exactly, believes that temperature readings from 1880 are comparable to those of today. They likely picked the more pleasant times of the day to go read the thermometers. Oh, wait, now I see the light. It's the ADJUSTOR department of the factory of REGULATED science. I see To you data is just a matter of faith. You believe in things, I trust in scientific method. The catholic church is well known for being the most trusted body of science facts and they agree with you. I will pray for your soul my child so you can see the light of the carbon tax to keep the poor in eternal serfdom... What am I saying? I am supposed to be a denier of the faith of al gore... Never mind that. You are playing the al gore card at the wrong place. I'm talking about data, not the suggestion your mind is automatically relating to the climate change. Again: your own opinion and "gut feeling" based on your worldview is more legitimate than data produced by the advanced scientific community. |
|
|
|
|
Wilikon (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon
|
|
June 25, 2015, 03:20:18 PM |
|
This data obsoletes all "solar activity, natural causes" crap posted above, enjoy If you believe your own opinion more than data, then you must believe in unicorns too and have a massive ego problem ... Says someone using [ size=20pt ] font to prove how big my ego is? 15pt is more than enough dude... Keep quoting that link with gif animation answers, it makes deniers look more stupid Sure... When I see stuff like this I really wonder who, exactly, believes that temperature readings from 1880 are comparable to those of today. They likely picked the more pleasant times of the day to go read the thermometers. Oh, wait, now I see the light. It's the ADJUSTOR department of the factory of REGULATED science. I see To you data is just a matter of faith. You believe in things, I trust in scientific method. The catholic church is well known for being the most trusted body of science facts and they agree with you. I will pray for your soul my child so you can see the light of the carbon tax to keep the poor in eternal serfdom... What am I saying? I am supposed to be a denier of the faith of al gore... Never mind that. You are playing the al gore card at the wrong place. I'm talking about data, not the suggestion your mind is automatically relating to the climate change. Again: your own opinion and "gut feeling" based on your worldview is more legitimate than data produced by the advanced scientific community. The 97% of the advanced scientific community does not exist. |
|
|
|
|
tvbcof
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4606
Merit: 1276
|
|
June 25, 2015, 05:10:45 PM |
|
What the hell is that quote supposed to mean? You seem to find it profound or something. In fact it is quite inane. For one thing, science even at it's peak has made some stunningly wrong 'pattern recognitions' and it never has been anywhere near 'surefire.' Any competent scientist will readily admit this. For another, it is regularly mis-used which makes it even less effective at accurate at 'pattern recognition' than it's potential. Examples of this could not be more blatant than the current 'catastrophic global climate change' shenanigans. |
sig spam anywhere and self-moderated threads on the pol&soc board are for losers.
|
|
|
hdbuck
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1002
|
|
June 25, 2015, 05:44:10 PM
Last edit: June 25, 2015, 06:29:10 PM by hdbuck |
|
What the hell is that quote supposed to mean? You seem to find it profound or something. In fact it is quite inane. For one thing, science even at it's peak has made some stunningly wrong 'pattern recognitions' and it never has been anywhere near 'surefire.' Any competent scientist will readily admit this. For another, it is regularly mis-used which makes it even less effective at accurate at 'pattern recognition' than it's potential. Examples of this could not be more blatant than the current 'catastrophic global climate change' shenanigans. science is the freemasons religion. |
|
|
|
|
Spendulus
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2898
Merit: 1386
|
|
June 25, 2015, 10:15:42 PM |
|
and your own opinion and "gut feeling" based on your worldview is more legitimate than data produced by the advanced scientific community. Your skirting the SCIENTIFIC ISSUE raises doubts about your interest actual science. I'll repeat what I said. When I see stuff like this I really wonder who, exactly, believes that temperature readings from 1880 are comparable to those of today. They likely picked the more pleasant times of the day to go read the thermometers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
kingaltcoins
|
|
June 30, 2015, 12:49:17 AM |
|
Don't blindly assume that all scientists agree here but climate change is real, it certainly appears as though this number has been fudged with by only taking the extreme weather.
|
|
|
|
|
Wilikon (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon
|
|
June 30, 2015, 01:44:47 AM |
|
Don't blindly assume that all scientists agree here but climate change is real, it certainly appears as though this number has been fudged with by only taking the extreme weather.
Climate change or global warming? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
galdur
|
|
June 30, 2015, 04:25:34 AM |
|
Arctic sea-ice extent as high for this date in a decadeJUNE 28, 2015 This is contrary to what the MSM has been saying. According to the Denmark Meteorological Institute, the ARCTIC sea ice extent is as high for this date as it has been in a decade. That means the ice just isn’t melting as fast as it has in recent years. This is how multiyear ice begins to accumulate. It will be interesting to see where things are at the end of the melt season. Check it out: http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/old_icecover.uk.php
|
|
|
|
|
