Activity on Sun flatlines. Cold Winters ahead?

[ATCclears]

Activity On The Sun Flatlines: Bitterly Cold Winters Ahead? | The Daily Sheeple

Read More

 

[oknow]

That is caused by global warming.

 

[Velzey]

It gets cold here every winter...and snows.

 

[chemist]

Global trends don't have to match up with your local weather. Look at the way that an incredibly warm Arctic triggered huge waves in the jet stream across central N. America, bringing cold air much farther South than usual for the past two Winters.

In between the large-scale trends and our local weather we also have the cyclic events like the El Niño that led to the 1989 heat anomaly. Global in scale, but not a secular trend like the warming caused by the steadily climbing atmospheric CO2 concentration.

The single most important take-away from current climatological science is that more energy in the atmosphere equals larger fluctuations, meaning hotter, colder, drier, wetter, wilder weather than what we've been enjoying these past benign 70+ years.

Overall we know that the trend is - and must be: higher sea levels, bigger hurricanes, and drier tropics, but that doesn't guide any predictions for your area or your 2014.

 

[rick benjamin]

Global warming isn't the only scientific fact based on theory being re-visited...
Has the Big Bang theory been busted? | Space, Military and Medicine | News.com.au

 

[AMProducts]

The sun has been acting strange for a few years now, despite the fact that we should be near a solar maximum the sunspot numbers remain low, and have been low for the last few years.

Most of us look at climate as an earth thing, but it's important to remember our climate is a reflection not just of what's happening here on earth, but what's happening in our solar system as well. Just as important, the earth has been both hotter and cooler than it is now. The idea of "stability of climate" while relatively important to our temperate biology means nothing to this angry ball of rock we call home. I worry more about another ice age than I do about global warming.

That said, I'm not really sure the contributions made by string theory have much application to the current topic. Both string theory, general relativity, special relativity, quantum mechanics, and a whole bunch of sciences that overlap those all have something to say. To throw any of them out at this point is kinda silly. Much like global warming, I don't think it's wrong, I just think it has a really long way to go before being proven.

Even then, there have been periods where our atmosphere had orders of magnitude greater amounts of CO2 in it, as well as periods where there was more or less oxygen. As Plato said: All is flux.

 

[oknow]

Here is what is really going on the solar panels made in china are ending there life span, there are a couple spurts of energy left to cause a little bit of warming but the sun is not able to recharge it's batteries completely
and now since the power level is getting lower we are going to be going into a cooling period until china can replace the solar panels (under warranty I hope or more new taxes) once the new panels are up and running we will be able to get back into the global warming game

 

[erudne]

I suggest we all form a drum circle......

 

[Sgt Nambu]

The above can never happen while a former President Bush lives!

PS: Think I'll hold off on picking up those solar cells, though!

 

[Page.k]

Geomagnetic reversal of the poles makes a better case to me than the other options. Give me data they can keep the pipe and bull. I think the Pole shift hypothesis corrects the errors of the random weather that's been happening.
Solid Scientific Evidence we are Headed for a Pole Shift! (FULL LENGTH) - YouTube
:complain::complain::angry:This is Sparta!!!!

 

[AMProducts]

Geomagnetic reversal of the poles makes a better case to me than the other options. Give me data they can keep the pipe and bull. I think the Pole shift hypothesis corrects the errors of the random weather that's been happening.
Solid Scientific Evidence we are Headed for a Pole Shift! (FULL LENGTH) - YouTube
:complain::complain::angry:This is Sparta!!!!

I think Plato said it best when he said "All is Flux", same thing still applies, we're just talking magnetic flux

 

[Will_Power]

Global trends don't have to match up with your local weather. Look at the way that an incredibly warm Arctic triggered huge waves in the jet stream across central N. America, bringing cold air much farther South than usual for the past two Winters.

In between the large-scale trends and our local weather we also have the cyclic events like the El Niño that led to the 1989 heat anomaly. Global in scale, but not a secular trend like the warming caused by the steadily climbing atmospheric CO2 concentration.

The single most important take-away from current climatological science is that more energy in the atmosphere equals larger fluctuations, meaning hotter, colder, drier, wetter, wilder weather than what we've been enjoying these past benign 70+ years.

Overall we know that the trend is - and must be: higher sea levels, bigger hurricanes, and drier tropics, but that doesn't guide any predictions for your area or your 2014.

Hey, pal, stop it with your scientific theories and facts! We all know you scientists are just secret Bible-hating, atheist, anti-American communists anyway.

 

[chemist]

Thanks, Will. At least I got a smile from your post.
Like George Carlin said, "Think how stupid the average person is, and then realize that half of 'em are dumber than that!"

<broken link removed>

 

[Page.k]

With Geomagnetic Reversal it's like a plumper telling the "Doctors" what the illness and cure is. It'll be rejected until they can't any more. Now the big question is how long will it take to shift and reset it's self.

 

[AMProducts]

Thanks, Will. At least I got a smile from your post.
Like George Carlin said, "Think how stupid the average person is, and then realize that half of 'em are dumber than that!"

<broken link removed>

Seriously? you had to pull degrasse tyson into this? Dr Oz didn't have a quote you could pull?

If there's one thing I learned about science the more closely you had modeled the potential outcomes the more some overlooked variable will suddenly turn a mundane experiment that was being performed more to validate the data into a potentially life threatening situation, usually involving explosions and radiation.

Does remind me of this though: <broken link removed>

 

[chemist]

Good old common lead azide does exactly the same thing, spontaneously detonating on crystallization, when prepared the same way. Diffuse the lead solution slowly into the azide solution, grow big crystals, and BOOM! But dump two high-concentration solutions together quickly with stirring and - nothing.

I fail to see the relevance. This is not about "proving," it's about modeling. Models aren't true or false, they're merely more or less useful based on their predictive value. There is absolutely no doubt that the last time atmospheric CO2 rose as high as it is now, the climate was far hotter and sea level far higher. That's in the fossil record, period.

The presence of confounding factors - like the oft-cited insolation variability and Milankovitch cycles - changes nothing. The "Stage 5 problem" shows how poorly correlated the Milankovitch cycles are with climate swings, and the current trend should be cooling the Earth right now anyway (Imbrie, 1976).

Besides, those effects are both too slow and way too small to have any bearing on the stunning, shocking, unprecedented climate flip that's going on right in front of our faces, right this moment. For anyone to look at the large-scale data and claim that anthropogenic forcing is not the cause,
...well, some people just can't be helped.

 

[The B]

Cold winters? Hellz yea, bring dat shyt on, dawg.. need me sum ice

 

[AMProducts]

Good old common lead azide does exactly the same thing, spontaneously detonating on crystallization, when prepared the same way. Diffuse the lead solution slowly into the azide solution, grow big crystals, and BOOM! But dump two high-concentration solutions together quickly with stirring and - nothing.

I fail to see the relevance. This is not about "proving," it's about modeling. Models aren't true or false, they're merely more or less useful based on their predictive value. There is absolutely no doubt that the last time atmospheric CO2 rose as high as it is now, the climate was far hotter and sea level far higher. That's in the fossil record, period.

The presence of confounding factors - like the oft-cited insolation variability and Milankovitch cycles - changes nothing. The "Stage 5 problem" shows how poorly correlated the Milankovitch cycles are with climate swings, and the current trend should be cooling the Earth right now anyway (Imbrie, 1976).

Besides, those effects are both too slow and way too small to have any bearing on the stunning, shocking, unprecedented climate flip that's going on right in front of our faces, right this moment. For anyone to look at the large-scale data and claim that anthropogenic forcing is not the cause,
...well, some people just can't be helped.

I'm agnostic about anthropogenic climate change, I'll take solid proof in either direction, problem is, every prediction made by the global warming scientists has never panned out. Sea levels are not rising, the arctic hasn't melted, yea there are places where glaciers are retreating, but most have been doing that for hundreds of years.

Truth is usually simple. If your solution is complicated, that means a simpler explanation was overlooked or ignored. Even if you had to create several very complex solutions, once you combine them most of the math cancels out. A key example of this, before Kepler, the mathematics used to describe the motion of the planets was beyond complex. However once the fundamental assumption (the earth being the center of the universe) was discarded, the equations were simplified that any grade-schooler could use them.

 

[cookie]

No global warming!! How is Al Gore the inventor of the internet going to make billions off of the carbon trading scam?

 

[chemist]

Good God, AMProds, the Arctic is not melting?? The sea level isn't rising? The overwhelming majority of glaciers haven't massively retreated in the past century??? Nobody can help you until you help yourself.

This discussion is over, until you choose to open your eyes to the NOAA data that are freely available, and look past your own confirmation bias. Maybe the first step is to make up your own mind, instead of deferring to conclusions drawn at websites that cherry-pick irrelevant outlier points to push their agendas.

For pete's sake, use common sense! Do you really believe that a hundred thousand climatologists either don't know what they're doing, or are totally corrupted, and yet a hundred paid shills for the petro industries and right-wing think tanks somehow have access to the suppressed truth?

http://whowhatwhy.com/wp-content/up...2169154111_1010664_37712606_1688554057_n1.jpg
Flexibility is the root of learning.