04 June 2008

Sunspots Vanish, Earth Cools, CAGW Dying

Although total solar irradiance (TSI) may vary by only 0.1% over time, the effect this small variance has on the climate of Earth is profound. By charting trends in solar activity, and factoring in ocean oscillations such as the AMO, PDO etc, one can explain most of the cyclic variations in Earth's climate without considering variations in atmospheric CO2. Since H2O is the predominant greenhouse gas in the Earth climate system, it is likely that a better understanding of the water cycle will fill in large gaps remaining in the understanding of ordinary changes in Earth climate. Catastrophic changes--like glaciations--will likely need longer time scale explanations that can easily reach outside of our solar system.The Earth's temperature has not warmed over the past 10 years, even 20 years by some estimates. The recent month of May was quite cool, globally speaking. There are no sunspots yet again today. We have had nothing but "sun specks" recently, and the long overdue Solar Cycle 24 has yet to come out to play with the planets.

Some scientists are even predicting that sunspots will disappear altogether by the year 2015. It is unlikely that the sunspots themselves are causing warming or cooling, but the current paucity of sunspots reveals an unusual, unpredicted prolongation of solar cycle 23--and a delay to the start of solar cycle 24. Historically, longer solar cycles correlate with cooler temperatures, and lower numbers of sunspots correlate with lower temperatures. Please do not confuse "correlation" with "causation." Such confusion has made monkeys out of Al Gore and James Hansen, along with Ramachandra Pachauri.

CAGW is dying for lack of substantiation. It is being propped up by Nancy Pelosi, Barbara Boxer, other corrupt politicians, the news and entertainment media, and a few outspoken "climate celebrities" whose futures hinge upon keeping the public believing in catastropohic warming.

It is a matter of time. The current neurosyphilitic US Congress is gambling the economic future of the US on the CAGW hypothesis. If the hypothesis fails--which so far it is doing spectacularly--the futures of the climate crusading congressmen and celebrities will fail equally spectacularly. They simply must keep the charade going as long as they can, for their own sake.

H/T Tom Nelson

Labels: , ,

Bookmark and Share


Anonymous Anonymous said...

Alternatively, as the climate continues to cool, these fools could simply claim that their stupid measures are helping and so must be increased...

Wednesday, 04 June, 2008  
Blogger al fin said...

Strangely, true. Perception, image, is everything, for fools.

The news and entertainment media shape public opinion in a profound way. When David Dinkins was elected mayor of New York City, even the homeless were suddenly happy, according to the media. When Bill Clinton was elected US President in 1992, the hordes of the homeless simply disappeared (!) and the economy suddenly cured itself overnight, almost two months before the new president was inaugurated, according to reliable news accounts.

Just electing President Obama might go a long way toward saving the planet. Overnight. Long before he is inaugurated, the Earth will know that its saviour is on his way.

Image is everything, to idiots. The media is all about creating image.

Wednesday, 04 June, 2008  
Blogger Barba Rija said...

What will you do then, Al Fin, if the opposite of what you say here is true?

What will you do then, Al Fin, if the IPCC report is in fact in a somewhat correspondence with reality?

Will you stop spreading lies like the planet cooling for as much as 20 years?

Or will you just pretend it is nothing, blame the measuring tools, take the conspiracy theorist position, and rage against any scientific finding that backs GW?

I admire free-thinking. But you are jumping the shark here.

Thursday, 05 June, 2008  
Blogger al fin said...

The important question people should be asking themselves in this ongoing debate is: how do you falsify the IPCC models' predictions? If a hypothesis is not falsifiable, it is not science. If there is no way to falsify a hypothesis, it is not science, it is tautology.

Most of the true believers in climate orthodox religion have never even given a thought to how the CAGW hypothesis might be falsified. They begin by assuming the truth of the hypothesis, then go on from there.

Clearly, such thinking is religious rather than scientific.

Lucia has had a fascinating discussion at her site on this very topic for several weeks now. Roger Pielke Jr. has also touched on the same vital issue in contemporary climate policy discussion.

Thursday, 05 June, 2008  
Blogger IConrad said...

Barba Rija wrote:
What will you do then, Al Fin, if the IPCC report is in fact in a somewhat correspondence with reality?

Tiny problem with this line of thinking: it's already very powerfully wrong in a very real way. The IPCC's models -- in fact, every single model of every single anthropogenic climate change model ever made, has predicted that the PDO was "locked" into the heat cycle.

The PDO just flipped.

The IPCC has had to acknowledge that, for the last ten years, there has been distinct (if less than a full degree Celsius ) cooling of the primary source of future atmospheric heat: the oceanic surfaces. That's huge. It means that for at //LEAST// another ten to twenty years, we can expect an overall decline in temperatures from today's perspective.

Barba Rija wrote:
Will you stop spreading lies like the planet cooling for as much as 20 years?

It's not a lie, Barba Rija. Consider: All available data now belies the concept of the planet having been getting hotter since 1998 -- the overall trend since that date has been a cooling. This in and of itself is not all that spectacular, but when you //ALSO// consider that all the record temperatures since the year 2000 -- and, hence, the record temperatures to date have almost //EXCLUSIVELY// occurred during the the period before the post WWII era of cooling...

Well, it doesn't paint a pretty picture for the claims of anthropogenic global temperature forcing.

Thursday, 05 June, 2008  
Blogger Brent Lane said...

al Fin said:

"Just electing President Obama might go a long way toward saving the planet. Overnight. Long before he is inaugurated, the Earth will know that its saviour is on his way."

Apparently, Mr. Obama agrees with you on this.

"Because if we are willing to work for it, and fight for it, and believe in it, then I am absolutely certain that generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal; this was the moment when we ended a war and secured our nation and restored our image as the last, best hope on earth."

- Barrack Obama, 3 June 2008

Thursday, 05 June, 2008  
Blogger SwampWoman said...

Ol' Obama is real impressed with himself, idn't he?

Al Gore: "And we would have gotten away with it if it hadn't been for that darn PDO!"

/Apologies for the gratuitous Scooby Doo reference.

Thursday, 05 June, 2008  
Blogger al fin said...

Brent and SW, when you are the Obamassiah, humility seems a bit unnecessary.

The Undamassiah would have to show more humility, of course.

What is a Massiah, you may ask? He is the overlord and master of the big mansion in the clouds, where all of us tired and worn out field hands want to live.

Thursday, 05 June, 2008  

Post a Comment

“During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act” _George Orwell

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts