Solar Minimum 2009, Global Cooling and the Record Breaking Winter

ibis

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 12, 2005
Messages
12,293
Yeah, that's good for me, but perfectly will to listen to an opposed point of view. See, I get involved in a lot of agricultural work and the weather from June to October is pretty critical.

2007 was fantastic because while the summer was awful we had a great run all the way until practically December getting product out of the ground. 2008 and 2009 was in a word, crap. If we could just get our act together and make sure the sun shines in the right months I won't b1tch again, honest...

Pat is right though about public opinion. In the end, despite all the reports and analysis, this is the important thing to have on your side. Up until last year everyone was nodding their heads sagely when global warming was mentioned.

Lately it's been all 'I'm not so sure....'
That's true, and is the natural result of the public understanding of the whole business being about a micrometre deep. That's not a criticism of the public, because it results both from a failure to adequately inform, and from the fact that most people have neither the time nor the background to get into the science in any depth.

In publicity terms, the 'climategate' PR has been very damaging for public perception, but hasn't made a bit of difference to the science. It was clearly aimed at taking the pressure off the climate opposition at Copenhagen, and did that very well.

Scientists are, in general, very poor communicators - and, indeed, understand the term differently. I put it to a friend of mine (who is a scientific academic) that scientists communicate poorly, and he said "I hardly think that's fair. We're good at communicating complex concepts within our discipline, assuming one has the necessary background, and of course we are far better at communicating the reliability and error margins in studies where the errors can be..." and so on for several minutes. At the end I said "exactly".

On the other hand, I would certainly criticise the role of the press, who have been as bad at reporting on this as on every other complex matter, from NAMA to cancer vaccines.
 
Last edited:


ibis

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 12, 2005
Messages
12,293
Tut tut. Calling people ignorant, that is not very nice. This thread is about the influence of Solar Activity on our climate. Are you denying that the Sun has influence on our climate?
Nobody denies that, but that's not the same as the claim that current solar changes are driving current climate change - and that one doesn't work.

How much have you studied solar radiation and its impact on the planets in general?
Ooh...well, quite a lot in my case, on account of building planetary models in Java. If you're referring to the "climate changes" being "observed" on Mars etc, please do so explicitly - I'll hold off on the obvious flaws in that argument until then.
 

Cassandra Syndrome

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 23, 2009
Messages
16,885
Sorry Cassandra I have been taking this thread off-topic. Apologies.
No worries Malbekh, I have no issues with off topic debates at all. Its the alarmists have side issued this back to CO2. I acknowledged CO2 as a potential threat way down the road to our ecosystem, but in terms of climate we are at the mercy of the sun.
 

Cassandra Syndrome

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 23, 2009
Messages
16,885
Nobody denies that, but that's not the same as the claim that current solar changes are driving current climate change - and that one doesn't work.



Ooh...well, quite a lot in my case, on account of building planetary models in Java. If you're referring to the "climate changes" being "observed" on Mars etc, please do so explicitly - I'll hold off on the obvious flaws in that argument until then.
Well why doesn't Mars retain heat with its 96% CO2 atmosphere? The plunge in temperatures at night is extreme. I am aware that its atmosphere is a lot smaller than Earth's. The air is thinner, but the Mars is one tenth the mass of Earth and it does have more tons of CO2 than Earth.
 

ibis

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 12, 2005
Messages
12,293
Well why doesn't Mars retain heat with its 96% CO2 atmosphere? The plunge in temperatures at night is extreme. I am aware that its atmosphere is a lot smaller than Earth's. The air is thinner, but the Mars is one tenth the mass of Earth and it does have more tons of CO2 than Earth.
It does retain heat - about 5 degrees of it - but Mars has an incredibly thin atmosphere compared to ours - the total mass of the Martian atmosphere is 0.48% of Earth's. In addition, Mars has no water vapour, which contributes most of the Earth's greenhouse effect. The mass of Mars makes absolutely no difference, since global warming is an atmospheric effect.
 

feargach

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 11, 2006
Messages
4,968
You guys need to convince random people like me who are not peer-reviewed in the things that we say but do form the basis of public opinion.

It mightn't have clicked with you yet, but if you want people to buy in to AGW you're going to have to explain it at a level that people like me can assimilate and understand. You can push as many graphs and peer-reviewed reports down my neck, but you're losing the battle. The optics of the IPCC and Copenhagen do nothing for this cause.

Going off an a personalised rant against me is not conducive the getting your point across.
I'm not trying to get my point across to you.

You don't matter.

In case you haven't noticed, this planet is not governed according to the whims of people who don't care about science and facts. Powerful people call the shots, and do as they please. They didn't get to be powerful by ignoring the boffins, however.

So fortunately, your opinions are of no import.

That's a good thing, because you seem to be of the opinion that knowledgeable people agreed to a prediction that Ireland would have heatwaves. They never did.

You are a fool or a liar, as far as I can tell. Is there a third option to explain your crazy statement that science predicted heatwaves in Ireland? I can't think of one, can you?
 

Malbekh

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
3,012
What on earth is your problem?

I'm merely pointing out that we've had global warming this and global warming that stuffed down our throats over the last few years, and personally, I haven't seen any indication to show for it.

It seems to me that the deciding factor with our weather patterns is the location of the jetstream.

So, you can decide and rebut my comments in the mild but reasonable language like ibis did, or you can foam in the mouth and start to personally insult me like you're doing now.

Really, seeing as I'm insignificant and don't matter why bother replying to my obviously infantile and flawed posts?

You're not John Gibbons by any chance? You have a similar style, play the man, not the ball.....
 

ibis

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 12, 2005
Messages
12,293
I'm merely pointing out that we've had global warming this and global warming that stuffed down our throats over the last few years, and personally, I haven't seen any indication to show for it.
Yeah...you're not really ever going to have anything dramatic to see in Ireland, I'm glad to say:



Pretty much every climate model comes out with Ireland experiencing very little change:



Good old St Patrick, eh?
 

ibis

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 12, 2005
Messages
12,293
There has been change here in Ireland as noticed by malbekh and myself as stated that the last 3 summers have been cooler than usual.

The dramatic change noticed is the regular frequency of Asperatus cloud which blankets large areas of the country, this cloud stops much of the sun's energy from reaching the land/sea surface.

You may dismiss my comment as irrelevant but to understand just how effective cloud is at reflecting heat all you have to do is stand in the sunlight and wait till a large cloud passes in front of the sun, within 30 seconds things get cooler, give it a few minutes and things start to feel cold here in Ireland. give it a few more months and what I've said here will make more sense.

The Asperatus has been classified as a new variety of cloud so the models you refer to probably hav'nt factored it in.
Er, yes - but the reason "asperatus" cloud is only now being recognised is not because it is a genuinely new type of cloud, but because it is very rare, and so has not been previously classified. It is certainly not blanketing large areas of Ireland on a regular basis - I'm afraid that stuff is perfectly normal clouds of the type we've always had.

And if you read my replies to Malbekh you'll notice that the last three years in Ireland have, in fact, been warmer on average by half a degree or a degree than the baseline, and either as sunny as normal, or sunnier. I'm not quite sure how you're going to fit that with your idea of the country being regularly blanketed by a new type of cloud and therefore cooler than normal, because it is, I'm afraid, the complete opposite.
 
Last edited:

Green eyed monster

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2008
Messages
2,429
I'm not trying to get my point across to you.

You don't matter.

In case you haven't noticed, this planet is not governed according to the whims of people who don't care about science and facts. Powerful people call the shots, and do as they please. They didn't get to be powerful by ignoring the boffins, however.

So fortunately, your opinions are of no import.

That's a good thing, because you seem to be of the opinion that knowledgeable people agreed to a prediction that Ireland would have heatwaves. They never did.

You are a fool or a liar, as far as I can tell. Is there a third option to explain your crazy statement that science predicted heatwaves in Ireland? I can't think of one, can you?
In democracies ordinary people are supposed to call the shots, i guess ecofascism is a word that has some basis in reality after all.

I am not decided on whether AGW is happening or not but i know enough about human nature and the human natures of those who have power in particular to know that they will find a way to exploit the story of it for their own ends, any sudden sharp shock or threat results in a greater concentration of power in fewer hands and a global realignment that benefits those with power..... So i am suspicious about the motives of those among the powerful preaching this tale of global warming, and also when i see federalists or other radicals preaching about it.... People with opinions as elitist as yours do not make me feel any more relaxed about those suspicions.
 

Destiny's Soldier

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 6, 2007
Messages
2,356
Perhaps, when thinking about global temperature, we need to do more than just list off "places that are cold":



Because, you know, other places aren't.

Ibis wants to carry on posting graphs of global temperature from NOAA and seem to think they are accurate and present them to us as being accurate. Nothing could be further from the truth.

E Michael Smith showed how after 1990, NOAA excised 4500 data collecting points from accross globe. Excising temperature stations that were rural, of a higher latitude and higher altitude. In other words, all the colder stations were taken out of the data and thus miraculously the world can be presented as getting hotter.

When are you Ibis going to face up to the fact you have NOTHING. You have nothing to show a human influence on Global Temperatures.

The real deniers of 2010 are the likes of IBIS, Akrasisa and company.
 
Last edited:

Malbekh

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
3,012
Ibis wants to carry on posting graphs of global temperature from NOAA and seem to think the are accurate and present them to us as being accurate. Nothing could be further from the truth.

E Michael Smith showed how after 1990, NOAA excised 4500 data collecting points from accross globe. Excising temperature stations that were rural, of a higher latitude and higher altitude. In other words, all the colder stations were taken out of the data and thus miraculously the world can be presented as getting hotter.

When are you Ibis going to face up to the fact you have NOTHING. You have nothing to show a human influence on Global Temperatures.

The real deniers of 2010 are the likes of IBIS, Akrasisa and company.
Ah excellent, an opposing perspective that's good (for democracy). Who is E. Michael Smith then, and why would his views be so damning about the NOAA (whoever they are).

Not being completely ignorant I did read that some existing data points for accumulation information on weather and temperatures were indeed based in urban areas, or besides airfields or dumps/power stations etc. So assume this would skew the figures somewhat?

This fence sitting is quite a pain in the ass you know :D
 

feargach

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 11, 2006
Messages
4,968
E Michael Smith showed how after 1990, NOAA excised 4500 data collecting points from accross globe. Excising temperature stations that were rural, of a higher latitude and higher altitude. In other words, all the colder stations were taken out of the data and thus miraculously the world can be presented as getting hotter.
Got a link for this? Who is E Michael Smith? Who peer reviews his work?

I tried to google it and found nothing. Is the Grand Conspiracy working to eliminate all the evidence of it from the internet?

Uh-oh, as an individual who knows about it and is willing to post what he believes to be the truth, are you in trouble? Will the black helicopters be appearing over your house soon?
 

Destiny's Soldier

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 6, 2007
Messages
2,356
This link has been posted on other threads. Watch for the best spent 10 mins of your week.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AsQfr7wRZsw"]YouTube- MORE CLIMATEGATE!? US Govt. agencies involved in Data Manipulation FRAUD! NASA, NOAA, AND MORE[/ame]
 

Malbekh

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
3,012
This link has been posted on other threads. Watch for the best spent 10 mins of your week.

YouTube- MORE CLIMATEGATE!? US Govt. agencies involved in Data Manipulation FRAUD! NASA, NOAA, AND MORE
Um. Sorry but I'm not convinced, seeing a You Tube from some random computer programmer on some US network I've never heard of is not going to convince me. I'm not saying that the data is being presented in a favourable way and that he may be speaking the truth, but as a source it's exceptionally weak.
 

Destiny's Soldier

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 6, 2007
Messages
2,356
Um. Sorry but I'm not convinced, seeing a You Tube from some random computer programmer on some US network I've never heard of is not going to convince me. I'm not saying that the data is being presented in a favourable way and that he may be speaking the truth, but as a source it's exceptionally weak.
Sure it is EXCEPTIONALLY weak. God help us.

He has a website. I'm not going to spoonfeed you.
Look I'll make it simple.

Post a Graph showing an alignment of MAN MADE CO2 Emissions and Global Temperatures for the past 100 years.

I'll help you again, there is NO such graph.

 
Last edited:

fiannafailure

Well-known member
Joined
May 16, 2009
Messages
2,066
I'm not trying to get my point across to you.

You don't matter.

In case you haven't noticed, this planet is not governed according to the whims of people who don't care about science and facts. Powerful people call the shots, and do as they please. They didn't get to be powerful by ignoring the boffins, however.

So fortunately, your opinions are of no import.

That's a good thing, because you seem to be of the opinion that knowledgeable people agreed to a prediction that Ireland would have heatwaves. They never did.

You are a fool or a liar, as far as I can tell. Is there a third option to explain your crazy statement that science predicted heatwaves in Ireland? I can't think of one, can you?
Powerful people call the shots, and do as they please
People become powerful because they do rather than study

They didn't get to be powerful by ignoring the boffins, however.
No they usually shoot them first


feargach, I think its time you had rest, get yourself a massage, a whisky and a quite restful room, you will feel a lot better in the morning
 

Malbekh

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
3,012
Sure it is EXCEPTIONALLY weak. God help us.

He has a website. I'm not going to spoonfeed you.
Look I'll make it simple.

Post a Graph showing an alignment of MAN MADE CO2 Emissions and Global Temperatures for the past 100 years.

I'll help you again, there is NO such graph.
I'm afraid I do need to get spoon-fed. I'm joe public in Ireland not in the US. However, I take your point about the correlation between CO2 emissions and global temperatures.

Is this similar to the famous and now discounted hockey stick graph?

Bear with me on this, people are interested and looking in so you have an audience. Besides, Cassandra has said I can take it off topic.

Thanks
 

fiannafailure

Well-known member
Joined
May 16, 2009
Messages
2,066
DS


Post a Graph showing an alignment of MAN MADE CO2 Emissions and Global Temperatures for the past 100 years.

I'll help you again, there is NO such graph.
In the real world, things are a little more complicated than that, a tasty bread has a few more ingredients than water and flour
 


New Threads

Top