All Scientists are Sceptics ~Professor Bob Carter

Whenever someone asserts that a scientific question is “settled,” they tell me immediately that they don’t understand the first thing about science. Science is never settled. Dr David Deming

Perhaps the most frustrating aspect of the science of climate change is the lack of any real substance in attempts to justify the hypothesis ~Professor Stewart Franks

A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
-- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin - See more at: http://thepeoplescube.com/lenin/lenin-s-own-20-monster-quotes-t185.html#sthash.aTrSI3tG.dpuf
A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
-- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin - See more at: http://thepeoplescube.com/lenin/lenin-s-own-20-monster-quotes-t185.html#sthash.aTrSI3tG.dpuf
A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
-- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin - See more at: http://thepeoplescube.com/lenin/lenin-s-own-20-monster-quotes-t185.html#sthash.aTrSI3tG.dpuf

Tuesday, 5 May 2015

After the Global Warming Plateau, will temperatures go UP or DOWN?


Chriss W Street, writing for Breibart.com doesn't start off with "It's the Sun, Stupid," but does start with:
The sun is known to be the main driver of all weather and climate. 
And, although that political body, the InterGOVERNMENTAL Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) cannot investigate the Sun as a contributor to Climate Change (They are restricted to looking at man's influence on the climate) recently even a deluded supporter of the alarmist's position asked me:
However did you find out that the Sun contributes energy to the thermal budget of the Earth? (Grammar, punctuation etc corrected for the sensible readers of this blog.)
Hety Mr Deluded. I knew it all along. It was your side of the debate who tried to negate the Sun's influence.

Back to Mr Street's Article:
With 99.86% of the mass in our solar system, the great ball of violent fire in the sky, has recently gone quiet in what is likely to be the weakest sunspot cycle in more than a century. Weak solar cycles have been associated with very benign “space weather” that can cause a “Little Ice Age.”
Of solar cycles, Wikipedia says:
The solar cycle (or solar magnetic activity cycle) is the periodic change in the Sun's activity (including changes in the levels of solar radiation and ejection of solar material) and appearance (visible in changes in the number of sunspots, flares, and other visible manifestations). Solar cycles have an average duration of about 11 years. 
So, if solar cycles have an average duration of about 11 years,

not since “Solar Cycle 14″ in February 1906 has there been a cycle with fewer sunspots during what astrophysicists call the “solar maximum phase” for a cycle. The smoothed average number of daily sunspots in the current “Solar Cycle 24″ spiked to a “solar maximum” of 81.9 in April 2014, surpassing an earlier cycle peak of 66.9 in February 2012. Since April 2014, the number of sunspots has consistently shrunk.
Sunspot numbers for the prior solar cycle (#23) and the current solar cycle (#24) with its two peaks highlighted; courtesy Hathaway, NASA/ARC

Vencore Weather says:

The Sun is now virtually blank during the weakest solar cycle in more than a century 
Going back to 1755, there have been only a few solar cycles in the previous 23 that have had a lower number of sunspots during its maximum phase. 
If history is a guide, it is safe to say that weak solar activity for a prolonged period of time can have a cooling impact on global temperatures in the troposphere which is the bottom-most layer of Earth’s atmosphere - and where we all live. There have been two notable historical periods with decades-long episodes of low solar activity. The first period is known as the “Maunder Minimum”, named after the solar astronomer Edward Maunder, and it lasted from around 1645 to 1715. \ 
The second one is referred to as the “Dalton Minimum”, named for the English meteorologist John Dalton, and it lasted from about 1790 to 1830 (below). Both of these historical periods coincided with colder-than-normal global temperatures in an era now referred to by many scientists as the “Little Ice Age”.
Incidentally, why do I call the InterGOVERNMENTAL Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) a political body?

Well, for at least two reasons:
  • The IPCC was set up to only consider man's influence on the climate; and
  • The IPCC reports are reviewed line by line, not by scientists, but by government appointed delegates.

Consider man's influence on the climate:

The IPCC was set up to ONLY look at man's  GHG contribution to global warming.

As Dr Tim Ball writes, in The Deliberate Corruption of Climate Science:



and further ( from Joanne Nova)
“Thousands of scientists have been funded to find a connection between human carbon emissions and the climate. Hardly any have been funded to find the opposite. Throw 30 billion dollars at one question and how could bright, dedicated people not find 800 pages worth of connections, links, predictions, projections and scenarios? (What’s amazing is what they haven’t found: empirical evidence.)

Reviewed line by line 

Approval means that the material has been subjected to detailed line by line discussions and agreement. It is the procedure used. (See the political body IPCC details - here)








2 comments:

  1. When did Joanne Nova become a Dr.
    Answer: Never or not yet or its still to happen.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. When did some-one hiding behind anonymity get the right to ask such a stupid question?

      Answer: Never.

      Delete





All serious comments published after moderation.
Comments should be polite, and respect all views.
No bad language. Spam never makes it!