Real climate change

[sofa.king]

Read this chucky

http://solarcycle24com.proboards.com/thread/2403/global-cooling-nears-2017-2053

[binthere]

cern recognized and accepted the science of variable sunspot activity as a major contributing factor to earths climate. 17th and 18th century crop shortages were believed to be a result of this mini ice age due to reduced sun spot activity. modern climate alarmists refuse to include this science in modern day climate modeling.

[furrowtickler]

Bingo , binthere .
It's the wording - you can't deny climate change . But it's the way climate change is being exaggerated that is the problem

[Jay-mo]

Bingo , binthere .
It's the wording - you can't deny climate change . But it's the way climate change is being exaggerated that is the problem

They keep changing the ground rules. First we had "global warming", then "climate change" and now I hear terms like "climate flux". All of course, caused by mans use of "fossil fuels" (thats another fav buzz word).

[sumdumguy]

They keep changing the ground rules. First we had "global warming", then "climate change" and now I hear terms like "climate flux". All of course, caused by mans use of "fossil fuels" (thats another fav buzz word).

Can we flip a three-sided coin?

For man to think he can control anything as immense or complex as weather, I don't think so, but then I am a denier.

[chuckChuck]

The author Theodore White is an astrologist! http://globalastrologyblog.blogspot.ca/

You are relying on astrology to analyze climate change?

Why not use a fortune teller or a ougy board?


Here is what the science says.
https://www.skepticalscience.com/solar-activity-sunspots-global-warming.htm
Sun & climate: moving in opposite directions
What the science says...

The sun's energy has decreased since the 1980s but the Earth keeps warming faster than before.


Climate Myth...

It's the sun
"Over the past few hundred years, there has been a steady increase in the numbers of sunspots, at the time when the Earth has been getting warmer. The data suggests solar activity is influencing the global climate causing the world to get warmer." (BBC)

Over the last 35 years the sun has shown a cooling trend. However global temperatures continue to increase. If the sun's energy is decreasing while the Earth is warming, then the sun can't be the main control of the temperature.

Figure 1 shows the trend in global temperature compared to changes in the amount of solar energy that hits the Earth. The sun's energy fluctuates on a cycle that's about 11 years long. The energy changes by about 0.1% on each cycle. If the Earth's temperature was controlled mainly by the sun, then it should have cooled between 2000 and 2008.

TSI vs. T
Figure 1: Annual global temperature change (thin light red) with 11 year moving average of temperature (thick dark red). Temperature from NASA GISS. Annual Total Solar Irradiance (thin light blue) with 11 year moving average of TSI (thick dark blue). TSI from 1880 to 1978 from Krivova et al 2007. TSI from 1979 to 2015 from PMOD (see the PMOD index page for data updates).



The solar fluctuations since 1870 have contributed a maximum of 0.1 °C to temperature changes. In recent times the biggest solar fluctuation happened around 1960. But the fastest global warming started in 1980.

Figure 2 shows how much different factors have contributed recent warming. It compares the contributions from the sun, volcanoes, El Niño and greenhouse gases. The sun adds 0.02 to 0.1 °C. Volcanoes cool the Earth by 0.1-0.2 °C. Natural variability (like El Niño) heats or cools by about 0.1-0.2 °C. Greenhouse gases have heated the climate by over 0.8 °C.

Contribution to T, AR5 FigFAQ5.1

Figure 2 Global surface temperature anomalies from 1870 to 2010, and the natural (solar, volcanic, and internal) and anthropogenic factors that influence them. (a) Global surface temperature record (1870–2010) relative to the average global surface temperature for 1961–1990 (black line). A model of global surface temperature change (a: red line) produced using the sum of the impacts on temperature of natural (b, c, d) and anthropogenic factors (e). (b) Estimated temperature response to solar forcing. (c) Estimated temperature response to volcanic eruptions. (d) Estimated temperature variability due to internal variability, here related to the El Niño-Southern Oscillation. (e) Estimated temperature response to anthropogenic forcing, consisting of a warming component from greenhouse gases, and a cooling component from most aerosols. (IPCC AR5, Chap 5)

Some people try to blame the sun for the current rise in temperatures by cherry picking the data. They only show data from periods when sun and climate data track together. They draw a false conclusion by ignoring the last few decades when the data shows the opposite result.

[sofa.king]

I guess you shouldn't believe everything you read to be the truth it works both ways.

[chuckChuck]

Sofa there are reliable and credible sources of information based on peer reviewed science. And then there is the link you posted which is based on astrology.

If you and many others on Agriville don't know the difference, then we are have a serious problem.

[sumdumguy]

1870-1980 = .8 Degrees celsius? Two points in time where so many underlying variables have changed, data is only relevant between two points if all underlying variables remaining constant as in no painting the weather boxes, no pavement within 20 miles, no changing externalities. If you notice, all credible data is collected in controlled environments. You know why grassie?

[Lex]

There have always been fluctuations in the temperature of the earth. The ongoing debate is whether humans are causing the increase.

My question is which are we more likely to survive. Warming or cooling. We are so focused on the discussion about whether or not we are causing global warming that we may be completely missing the more important discussion.

I am quite certain than humans will survive a warming cycle. But the next ice age may be much more threatening.

Based on historical cycles the next ice age seems inevitable.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Sofa there are reliable and credible sources of information based on peer reviewed science. And then there is the link you posted which is based on astrology.

If you and many others on Agriville don't know the difference, then we are have a serious problem.

Not saying that I believe in most aspects of Astrology, especially not horrorscopes. But there is science behind what Theodore White claims. The gravitational pull of the large planets has an effect on our sun, and our sun does have an effect on our climate, even if the AGW crowd believes otherwise. Whether that can be quantified into accurate multi decade forecasts is yet to be proven, at least to me, but I am willing to entertain the notion.

Living on the edge of productive farmland as I do, future climate information is vital to my future business decisions. It would be very comforting to believe the AGW forever hypothesis and plan accordingly, but the stakes are too high to not consider all possible outcomes and sources of information before making long term plans.

As a believer in AGW, what steps have you taken to prepare for the inevitable multi degree warming? Is dryland cropping agriculture still viable in your area if temps raise by 2 degrees?

[macdon02]

Simon Atkins with AFC weather is talking the exact same situation as Mr. White. In his last weekly update he shows how there's zero basis in NOAA's data for an El Nino. Rather a la Nina is present. They are cooking the data just like the whistle-blowers claim. Now the odd thing is if you tie Mr. Whites claims as well as AFC and Armstrong all together they show the exact same situation developing. Cooling this year with a turn in grain prices to higher levels.

[fjlip]

There have always been fluctuations in the temperature of the earth. The ongoing debate is whether humans are causing the increase.

My question is which are we more likely to survive. Warming or cooling. We are so focused on the discussion about whether or not we are causing global warming that we may be completely missing the more important discussion.

I am quite certain than humans will survive a warming cycle. But the next ice age may be much more threatening.

Based on historical cycles the next ice age seems inevitable.

Absolutely correct, I have said it many times, COLD = death, WARM= more life! Let's change it faster, or prevent the coming COOLING!

[oneoff]

And just what has anyone done lately about returning world human population to previous levels.

That real problem (if CO2 "reducers"would take a minute to acknowledge) is where the long term equilibrium truly lies.

The"well intentioned" idiots are in charge of the asylum. Look at all (or at least more) of the trends and you'll see where the changes might be placed.

[sumdumguy]

I just read an article that thinks that it is Canada's time to shine in climate research and technology because Trump has taken US out of it, can't win.