What's going on with the Sun?

On Jul 2, 10:15*am, "Giga2" "Giga2" just(removetheseandaddmatthe
wrote:

Maybe this was happening in parts of the US in the 1960s but for most of
that decade most of *western* Europe was still recovering from WW2.

Au contraire, Sunshine. I was growing up in the UK at the time. From
commuting to school by bicycle to commuting to work by bicycle from
the early to the late 60s. Motor traffic volume exploded in the 60s as
vast numbers of motorcycles and bicycles were dumped or scrapped. The
dawn chorus on our main road into the city went from solo blackbird to
a continuous roar of nose-to-tail traffic.

In article
,
Brad Guth wrote:

On Jul 1, 6:17*pm, Orval Fairbairn wrote:
In article ,
*Sam Wormley wrote:

On 7/1/11 7:13 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
Using our moon to interactively block up to 3% of solar influx would
certainly reverse GW and AGW combined, and we'd be all set for
thousands of years to come, or at least until every last spendy and
bloody drop or kg of hydrocarbon fuel is expended during or by some
time after WW3 or WW4 that leaves less than 500 million cranky humans
on Earth.

* *How could this be done?

It can't. It is yet another delusion by "Guthy Gander," aka "Guthball,"
who holds that the moon landings were a hoax. Need I elaborate?

Are you saying the laws of physics and orbital dynamics do not
actually work?

They do, but you obviously don't understand them!

On 01/07/2011 07:52, Giga2 Giga2 wrote:
"Sam wrote in message
...
What's going on with the Sun?
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/46387

"Earlier this month a lot of column inches were devoted to the news that
the Sun continues to behave in a peculiar manner – and that solar activity
could be about to enter a period of extended calm. The story emerged after
three groups of researchers presented independent studies at the annual
meeting of the Solar Physics Division of the American Astronomical
Society, which appear to support this theory. But are the new findings
really that clear-cut and what implications do they have for the climate
here on Earth?

"Finally, even if the Sun were to head into a quiet period, others argue
that the reduction in solar irradiance on Earth would still be small
compared with the heating caused by man-made global warming. Mike
Lockwood, a researcher at the University of Reading, estimates that the
change in climate radiative forcing since the Maunder minimum is about one
tenth of the change caused by man-made trace greenhouse gases".

See: http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/46387


Keep your fingers crossed Sam because if temps start *falling* the cult is
completely over and you will perhaps have to face reality.



And if the long term temperatures continue to increase, what will you do?

On 01/07/2011 17:52, The_Doubter wrote:

"Chris L Peterson" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 1 Jul 2011 07:48:42 -0400, "The_Doubter"
wrote:

They are only looking at the current solar cycle. There could be other
cycles unknown because their periods might be thousands of years, and
one of
those cycles could be causing heating here on this planet.

There very likely are longer cycles of solar output. But they are not
responsible for the current warming trend.

In your opinion of course, but I don't see any evidence supporting this
statement.


So you keep on saying.

You are 'The_Doubter', that's what you are. If you were
"The_Evidence_Examiner" you might be just a little bit more informed
about the evidence.

And then you might have an informed opinion.

that is questionable, based upon the sad state of the IPCC's
characterization
of urban heat-isanding. I see that no-one has ever taken me up on
this;
oh God-am well.

"OG" wrote in message
...
On 01/07/2011 07:52, Giga2 Giga2 wrote:
"Sam wrote in message
...
What's going on with the Sun?
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/46387

"Earlier this month a lot of column inches were devoted to the news that
the Sun continues to behave in a peculiar manner – and that solar
activity
could be about to enter a period of extended calm. The story emerged
after
three groups of researchers presented independent studies at the annual
meeting of the Solar Physics Division of the American Astronomical
Society, which appear to support this theory. But are the new findings
really that clear-cut and what implications do they have for the climate
here on Earth?

"Finally, even if the Sun were to head into a quiet period, others argue
that the reduction in solar irradiance on Earth would still be small
compared with the heating caused by man-made global warming. Mike
Lockwood, a researcher at the University of Reading, estimates that the
change in climate radiative forcing since the Maunder minimum is about
one
tenth of the change caused by man-made trace greenhouse gases".

See: http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/46387


Keep your fingers crossed Sam because if temps start *falling* the cult
is
completely over and you will perhaps have to face reality.



And if the long term temperatures continue to increase, what will you do?

I've always been open to the idea that CAGW *is* correct. If any evidence
can be found to support I'm willing to look at it. I would be even more
willing if temps were rising.

"Chris.B" wrote in message
...
On Jul 2, 10:15 am, "Giga2" "Giga2" just(removetheseandaddmatthe
wrote:

Maybe this was happening in parts of the US in the 1960s but for most of
that decade most of *western* Europe was still recovering from WW2.

Au contraire, Sunshine. I was growing up in the UK at the time.

=Which is why I was talking about Western Europe more generally. However
even the UK, outside London, there was still very few cars AFAIK until quite
late 60s. And btw you cannot detect Mr and Mrs Jones taking there summer
holiday by car to the Cotwolds in the co2 records lol!

From
commuting to school by bicycle to commuting to work by bicycle from
the early to the late 60s.

=Thank you, late 60s, that is what I was saying???

Motor traffic volume exploded in the 60s as
vast numbers of motorcycles and bicycles were dumped or scrapped. The
dawn chorus on our main road into the city went from solo blackbird to
a continuous roar of nose-to-tail traffic.

=This was London? Yeah late 60s it was starting especially in big cities but
that is hardly western Europe as a whole!?

=OTOH looking at this site (if it is accurate) says there was 10m cars in
the road by 61!
http://www.northyorkshire.police.uk/...?articleid=563

"OG" wrote in message
...
On 01/07/2011 17:52, The_Doubter wrote:

"Chris L Peterson" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 1 Jul 2011 07:48:42 -0400, "The_Doubter"
wrote:

They are only looking at the current solar cycle. There could be other
cycles unknown because their periods might be thousands of years, and
one of
those cycles could be causing heating here on this planet.

There very likely are longer cycles of solar output. But they are not
responsible for the current warming trend.

In your opinion of course, but I don't see any evidence supporting this
statement.


So you keep on saying.

You are 'The_Doubter', that's what you are. If you were
"The_Evidence_Examiner" you might be just a little bit more informed about
the evidence.

And what evidence would that be exactly? If you're going to show me graphs
or tables of what XXX scientists say, I'm not convinced. I think "they" are
wrong for promoting such an agenda based on so little CURRENT evidence. And
there's nothing to show me that the testing they use for past evidence is
any accurate.

You know, "they" keep saying that there's no evidence that cell phones cause
cancer. My prediction: watch what happens within the next 20 years
(assuming pitiful man is still here).

BTW, you ever take a look at who FUNDS these so-called climate science
studies? .

And then you might have an informed opinion.

I think somebody else needs to do their homework. A lot of somebody elses.

On Thu, 30 Jun 2011 15:58:11 -0500, Sam Wormley
wrote:

What's going on with the Sun?

http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/46387

"Earlier this month a lot of column inches were devoted to the news that
the Sun continues to behave in a peculiar manner – and that solar
activity could be about to enter a period of extended calm. The story
emerged after three groups of researchers presented independent studies
at the annual meeting of the Solar Physics Division of the American
Astronomical Society, which appear to support this theory. But are the
new findings really that clear-cut and what implications do they have
for the climate here on Earth?

"Finally, even if the Sun were to head into a quiet period, others argue
that the reduction in solar irradiance on Earth would still be small
compared with the heating caused by man-made global warming. Mike
Lockwood, a researcher at the University of Reading, estimates that the
change in climate radiative forcing since the Maunder minimum is about
one tenth of the change caused by man-made trace greenhouse gases".

See: http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/46387

I saw that a day ago. =NONE= of the solar physicists on the
planet, as far as I could find, have said the possible "calm
period" would cool Earth. A few have said it might reduce solar
radiance, temporarily decreasing the current 0.79c anomalous
global temperature increase caused by humanity's CO2 production,
by from 0.2c to 0.4c

The "it's going to get cooler!" belief appears to be yet another
FOX "News" lie fed into the cult's echo chamber. No scientist in
the field said it.


--
Science can best be thought of as the endeavor by which humanity
works to move the answer "I don't know" back one "Why?" at a time.

If you aren't at least three deviations from the norm, you're just part of the crowd.

On Fri, 1 Jul 2011 08:45:42 +1000, "Vince Morgan"
wrote:

On Thu, 30 Jun 2011 15:58:11 -0500, Sam Wormley wrote:

What's going on with the Sun?
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/46387

"Earlier this month a lot of column inches were devoted to the news that
the Sun continues to behave in a peculiar manner – and that solar
activity could be about to enter a period of extended calm. The story
emerged after three groups of researchers presented independent studies
at the annual meeting of the Solar Physics Division of the American
Astronomical Society, which appear to support this theory. But are the
new findings really that clear-cut and what implications do they have
for the climate here on Earth?

"Finally, even if the Sun were to head into a quiet period, others argue
that the reduction in solar irradiance on Earth would still be small
compared with the heating caused by man-made global warming. Mike
Lockwood, a researcher at the University of Reading, estimates that the
change in climate radiative forcing since the Maunder minimum is about
one tenth of the change caused by man-made trace greenhouse gases".

See: http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/46387

I estimate that such estimations will be freely and often adjusted in
accordance with the estimated public impact of said second estimations.

You mean "Among the FOX 'News' obeying public."


--
Science can best be thought of as the endeavor by which humanity
works to move the answer "I don't know" back one "Why?" at a time.

If you aren't at least three deviations from the norm, you're just part of the crowd.