- Reaction score
- 6,067
- Points
- 1,160
:goodpost:
NavyShooter said:I'm a skeptic, because from what I gather one of the premises of climate 'science' is that the impact of solar radiance from the sun is not factored in....and heavens to betsy, don't ever question because that means you are denying the science.
Loachman said:"It is important to note that the model is an independent source of information for comparisons and as long as it is not used over solar cycle time scales it provides a reliable time series for time scales of less than a year."
There has been no appreciable global warming for almost two decades, even as atmospheric carbon dioxide increases (yet is still a small fraction of the atmospheric composition).
Solar radiance is not a factor? Shut the sun off for a while and see. We could have 100% carbon dioxide atmosphere, and the globe would be much colder than it is.
When the sun sets in the evening, temperatures generally cool, and rise again when the sun rises (air mass temperatures vary, yes, but weather is the result of solar heating).
What bigger factor is there than solar radiance?
Our climate warms and cools in step with solar cycles. There is no bigger influence.
RADOPSIGOPACISSOP said:What we have here is just a collection of ex-MWOs that are just finally excited that they've agreed on something. They've figured it out, obviously the scientists are wrong because one spot in Greenland saw more ice and it was cold here last week.
It's willful blindness to the evidence that's plain to see and the experts (but I mean, obviously the experts are wrong/in the pocket of solar panel companies right?)he
Good job cracking the case! Now sit back and tend to your November gardens.
YZT580 said:So if CO2 is the driving factor in the current changes explain why the early middle ages were warm enough to make both Greenland and Iceland (not to mention northern Newfoundland) appear attractive to Eric and his cronies. At the same time, the northwest passage was sufficiently clear that a significantly large Chinese fleet supposedly navigated successfully from west to east without significant difficulty.
There was certainly no increase in CO2 levels at that time. Then explain further why your experts are more correct than my experts who provide the flip side of the argument. When you have provided those explanations please explain why being warmer is so bad that we must expend countless millions to try and slow the rate of increase: what's wrong with harvesting winter wheat in Estevan?
I just finished reading an article on the re-capture of Mosul. The city has been almost totally destroyed with thousands of residents either displaced or dead but Iraq has defeated ISIS. The point being that sometimes the cure is worse than the disease. The operation was a total success but unfortunately, the patient died. So too are the solutions to global warming (assuming your experts are correct and it is even happening because of CO2)
Remius said:think of solar radiance as though the sun is space heater set to a certain temperature. The closer or further you are will change your temperature but the heat radiating from it remains constant.
Remius said:The study is just showing no increase in heat from the sun for a few decades now.
Remius said:Solar cycles have roughly 11 year cycles and while it has been proven to have a small effect on climate change it doesn't explain why temperatures are much higher despite a decrease in solar activity in comparison to a century ago when solar activity was more intense.
Oldgateboatdriver said:Without getting into a (useless, as sceptics are sceptics as a unchangeable position, where climate change is concerned)
Oldgateboatdriver said:Every farmer in Canada will tell you that the climate IS changing and has been very noticeably modified in the past 15 years. I suspect that in a near (for agriculture) future, even the prairies will be able to start harvesting winter wheat.
RADOPSIGOPACISSOP said:What we have here is just a collection of ex-MWOs
RADOPSIGOPACISSOP said:obviously the scientists are wrong because one spot in Greenland saw more ice and it was cold here last week.
RADOPSIGOPACISSOP said:It's willful blindness to the evidence that's plain to see and the experts (but I mean, obviously the experts are wrong/in the pocket of solar panel companies right?)
RADOPSIGOPACISSOP said:I'm going to need a reference/citation on the chinese fleet through the northwest passage :rofl:
George Wallace said:All this talk about the sun has me wondering what the Climate Change Folk are going to say when the sun becomes a RED GIANT and swallows up all the planets out past Mars?
RADOPSIGOPACISSOP said:I'm going to need a reference/citation on the chinese fleet through the northwest passage :rofl:
Our last act will be to have one final laugh at the idiots who were concerned about CO2 raising the temperature by 2 C over the course of an entire century. There are far greater things to worry aboutGeorge Wallace said:All this talk about the sun has me wondering what the Climate Change Folk are going to say when the sun becomes a RED GIANT and swallows up all the planets out past Mars?