Cycle 25: No Global Warming - Mini Ice Age Is Next

Discussion in 'Politics' started by pspr, Jan 29, 2012.

  1. pspr


    I hate people who say, "I told you so!". :D

    The supposed ‘consensus’ on man-made global warming is facing an inconvenient challenge after the release of new temperature data showing the planet has not warmed for the past 15 years.

    The figures suggest that we could even be heading for a mini ice age to rival the 70-year temperature drop that saw frost fairs held on the Thames in the 17th Century.

    Based on readings from more than 30,000 measuring stations, the data was issued last week without fanfare by the Met Office and the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit. It confirms that the rising trend in world temperatures ended in 1997.

    Meanwhile, leading climate scientists yesterday told The Mail on Sunday that, after emitting unusually high levels of energy throughout the 20th Century, the sun is now heading towards a ‘grand minimum’ in its output, threatening cold summers, bitter winters and a shortening of the season available for growing food.

    Solar output goes through 11-year cycles, with high numbers of sunspots seen at their peak.

    We are now at what should be the peak of what scientists call ‘Cycle 24’ – which is why last week’s solar storm resulted in sightings of the aurora borealis further south than usual. But sunspot numbers are running at less than half those seen during cycle peaks in the 20th Century.

    Analysis by experts at NASA and the University of Arizona – derived from magnetic-field measurements 120,000 miles beneath the sun’s surface – suggest that Cycle 25, whose peak is due in 2022, will be a great deal weaker still.

    Read more:
  2. Lucrum


  3. Max E.

    Max E.

  4. pspr


    <img src="">
  5. Max E.

    Max E.

    That response made the joke worthwhile in my eyes. :D
  6. The above is a total BS misleading pseudo-science article

    The global average surface temperature in 2011 was the ninth warmest since 1880, according to NASA scientists. The finding continues a trend in which nine of the 10 warmest years in the modern meteorological record have occurred since the year 2000.

    The difference between 2011 and the warmest year in the GISS record (2010) is 0.22 degrees F (0.12 C). This underscores the emphasis scientists put on the long-term trend of global temperature rise. Because of the large natural variability of climate, scientists do not expect temperatures to rise consistently year after year. However, they do expect a continuing temperature rise over decades.

    The first 11 years of the 21st century experienced notably higher temperatures compared to the middle and late 20th century, Hansen said. The only year from the 20th century in the top 10 warmest years on record is 1998.

    Higher temperatures today are largely sustained by increased atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases, especially carbon dioxide. These gases absorb infrared radiation emitted by Earth and release that energy into the atmosphere rather than allowing it to escape to space. As their atmospheric concentration has increased, the amount of energy "trapped" by these gases has led to higher temperatures.
  7. pspr


    In typical liberal fashion you deny any truth that you don't agree with. Did I mention you are an idiot?

    "Analysis by experts at NASA and the University of Arizona..."
  8. 377OHMS



    I agree that he is an idiot. That assertion is well supported.

    I do not agree that his dementia is a manifestation of liberalism.

    The AGW disciples are an offshoot of liberalism, like Birtherism is an offshoot of conservatism. Both have been disowned by their parent philosophies.

    What puzzles me about AGW disciples is the same thing that puzzles me about Occupiers. What do they want? They seem unable to articulate any demands. What does futurecurrents want? Does he want our agreement? Does he just want to argue? What exactly does he want?

    The Church of the Fershimmeled Penis of Al Gore does not allow attacks on its "science" because it is not science to them, it is some kind of twisted gospel and you don't attack gospel.
  9. My only issue with GW is that they have no good backtesting of the data. In a fields where time is measured in aeons, we have not been on the planet long enuf to make an assertion one way or the other. That is the sticking point I have always had. On a planetary timeline we are literally the period at the end of this sentence.
    #10     Jan 30, 2012