European scientists' study shows woodypeckerhead rejects science MINI ICE AGE
-
Just delete them all because this whole story is a half truth anyway written by somebody with an agenda.
-
I kept posting it because woodpecker kept spamming it, so STFU.
Emotional knee jerky - seriously? You all mad because it's SCIENTISTS saying
the opposite of mmgw?
Truth is, you can bitch all you want, but mmgw is a political ploy/theory/redistribution of
wealth bunch of bs.
And sure enough, you bitchers are rejecting the model by these scientists because
it doesn't fit your agenda.
Too bad, so sad, mmgw is a farce, now it's been shown.
-
bitch, bitch, bitch.
in the other posted article... SHE ADMITS SHE DOES NOT DISPUTE THE POSSIBILITY
OF THE MINI ICE AGE.cherry picked, political agenda mmgw theory. It's now toast.
The dishonest "scientists" want to play the data to make their theory true.
-
Quiet Sun Means Cooling of Earth's Upper...www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/coolingthermosphere.htmlMay 04, 2014 · New measurements from a NASA satellite show a dramatic cooling in the upper atmosphere that correlates with the declining phase of the current solar cycle.
-
Quiet Sun Means Cooling of Earth's Upper...www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/coolingthermosphere.htmlMay 04, 2014 · New measurements from a NASA satellite show a dramatic cooling in the upper atmosphere that correlates with the declining phase of the current solar cycle.
-
bitch, bitch, bitch.
in the other posted article... SHE ADMITS SHE DOES NOT DISPUTE THE POSSIBILITY
OF THE MINI ICE AGE.cherry picked, political agenda mmgw theory. It's now toast.
The dishonest "scientists" want to play the data to make their theory true.
Again, another article from July 2015, four months before your Blaze "article":bitch, bitch, bitch.
in the other posted article... SHE ADMITS SHE DOES NOT DISPUTE THE POSSIBILITY
OF THE MINI ICE AGE.
cherry picked, political agenda mmgw theory. It's now toast.
The dishonest "scientists" want to play the data to make their theory true.
http://www.iflscience.com/environment/mini-ice-age-not-reason-ignore-global-warming
There Probably Won't Be A Mini Ice Age In 15 Years
Since our article yesterday about how reduced solar activity could lead to the next little ice age, IFLScience has spoken to the researcher who started the furor: Valentina Zharkova. She announced the findings from her team's research on solar activity last week at the Royal Astronomical Society. She noted that her team didn't realize how much of an impact their research would have on the media, and that it was journalists (including ourselves) who picked up on the possible impact on the climate. However, Zharkova says that this is not a reason to dismiss this research or the predictions about the environment.
We didn't mention anything about the weather change, but I would have to agree that possibly you can expect it, she informed IFLScience.
The future predicted activity of the Sun has been likened to the Maunder Minimum. This was a period when the Sun entered an especially inactive period, producing fewer sunspots than usual. This minimum happened at the same time that conditions in Northern America and Europe went unusually icy and cold, a period of time known as the little ice age.
The previous Maunder Minimum occurred in the 17th century and lasted between 50 and 60 years. During this time, winters were colder: for example the River Thames, which usually flows through London, notoriously froze over. The ice was so thick that people could walk from one side to the other. However, the citizens that lived in freezing, 17th century Europe survived these cold winters, and they didn't have the heating technology that we are fortunate enough to have today. If the next solar activity minimum does affect the weather on Earth, it will not be deadly for the human race.
Zharkova compared the Maunder Minimum with the one that her team predicted to occur around 15 years into the future. The next minimum will likely be a little bit shorter than the one in the 17th century, only lasting a maximum of three solar cycles (around 30 years).
The conditions during this next predicted minimum will still be chilly: " It will be cold, but it will not be this ice age when everything is freezing like in the Hollywood films, Zharkova chuckled ".
The predictions that Zharkova announced came from a mathematical program that analyzed data from the Sun. The team decided that they wanted to monitor the Sun's background magnetic field (which governs solar features like sunspots). You can see the team's data for cycles 2123 published in The Astrophysical Journal.
After analyzing the solar data with their model, Zharkova's team noticed something that no one had ever expected before: that the Sun produces the magnetic waves in pairs. Previously everyone had thought that there was only a single source of magnetic waves in the Sun, but the evidence suggested two sources. The team used these observations to predict how the Sun's magnetic field would change in the future. This is where we predicted this new Maunder minima, Zharkova added.
She commented on how the changes in the Sun are likely to affect the Earth's environment. During the minimum, the intensity of solar radiation will be reduced dramatically. So we will have less heat coming into the atmosphere, which will reduce the temperature.
However, Zharkova ends with a word of warning: not about the cold but about humanity's attitude toward the environment during the minimum. We must not ignore the effects of global warming and assume that it isn't happening. "The Sun buys us time to stop these carbon emissions", Zharkova says. "The next minimum might give the Earth a chance to reduce adverse effects from global warming".
-
And there you have it. Straight from the mouth of the very scientist who performed the research. No misinterpretation, no political spin.
And once again, Cal, you prove yourself to be nothing more than another Tea Party muppet; your brain and mouth are influenced more by propaganda and political ideology instead of your innate faculties of logic and reasoning.
You find some crackpot article on the Blaze, believe it to be 100% true, with absolutely no research to try to verify it's authenticity; and yet you cannot post their bullshit fast enough, it seems.
In other words:
Learn. Think. THEN Post, Cal.
-
Isn't it amazing how quickly Cal can go from "You are mad because a SCIENTIST is against mmgw! This person is an expert and knows what they're talking about!" to "Dishonest 'scientist' want to play the data to make their theory true. They're all secret liberals, funded by the govt, to help drive a redistribution of wealth!"
All based on if he agrees with what he *thinks* the scientist is saying.
And this Cal, is why I made fun of your original post (and the next 14). Because I know it would come to this. It ALWAYS does. And yet the next time a right wing site posts something inaccurate like this, it will end up right back on here.
But fuck, if we have conservatives that think a man actually lived in a fish, then it can't be hard to get them to believe what you want...
-
Everything seems to be taken care of here. Good work gentlemen.
-
It jars me everytime to see him use the term "knee jerk". Someone has "zero" self concept of himself. Frankly, and i'm being quite serious....I think they get emails in the morning directing them about what to spam on their various internet discussion boards for the day. That's how "owned" cal is. He looks at his puter in the morning for what to misrepresent and mislead about for the day. There's probably far left wingnuts that get the same from their respective sources of deceit and mistruths. I'm dead serious it is so eye opening to me to see what's going on in this country, and I "know" they target the elderly because I saw some of those chain emails that my mother forwarded to me trying to convince me Barracks a mooslim.
They know they can at least in part shape national trending discussions with these "missives" they send out in the mornings. Today is the day we RAGE against the GW hippy's!!!! To battle!!! If they offer any resistance hit them with this link......................that was disproven months ago BUT NO MATTER!! repetition repetition repetition!!
-
Briefly back to those emails I would sometimes get from my mother, one of em was a hit piece about Barracks mother. The usual whore of babel type drivel, I couldn't believe what I was seeing. I finally had to show this shit to my father who by and large didn't care what my mother and her church hens conversed about....but he saw that shit and he put an immediate stop to it because he realized what they were doing to my mothers mind. Every day the MOOSLIMS ARE COMING TOMMORROW, or CAPITALISM WILL DIE BY SUNDOWN if we don't stop <insert some democratic sponsored bill>. And they share an email acct and he simply wanted no association with this nonsense coming into this computer, and he is a republican...has never voted democrat for anything.
But you can sometimes see the clear cut and paste job Cal puts down in some of his posts here......and it's waiting for him in his mailbox every morning
-
I kept posting it because woodpecker kept spamming it, so STFU.
Emotional knee jerky - seriously? You all mad because it's SCIENTISTS saying
the opposite of mmgw?
Truth is, you can bitch all you want, but mmgw is a political ploy/theory/redistribution of
wealth bunch of bs.
And sure enough, you bitchers are rejecting the model by these scientists because
it doesn't fit your agenda.
Too bad, so sad, mmgw is a farce, now it's been shown.
You all mad because it's SCIENTISTS saying
the opposite of mmgw?
The "scientist" you're referring too made NO mention to a "mini ice age" or anything related to climate change in the original report.
She maintains the decline in solar activity will reduce solar irradiance, which heats the sun
She's not disputing neither the "mini ice age" possibility nor climate change in this paper.
Even if we did get cooler temperatures for 10 years, it would be entirely irrelevant to what's happening in our environment - which is still warming.
Not all republicans dispute climate change, FYI - See Jeb Bush, Chris Christie, Fiorina (kind of), Jim Gilmore, Lindsey Graham, Jindal, Kasich, Pataki.
Trump, Carson, Huckabee, Cruz - at least those guys refute any possibility of man-made climate change.
-
Carson and Huckabee aren't on my list of politicians I can trust with science...
-
The previous Maunder Minimum occurred in the 17th century and lasted between 50 and 60 years. During this time, winters were colder: for example the River Thames, which usually flows through London, notoriously froze over. The ice was so thick that people could walk from one side to the other. However, the citizens that lived in freezing, 17th century Europe survived these cold winters, and they didn't have the heating technology that we are fortunate enough to have today. If the next solar activity minimum does affect the weather on Earth, it will not be deadly for the human race.
Zharkova compared the Maunder Minimum with the one that her team predicted to occur around 15 years into the future. The next minimum will likely be a little bit shorter than the one in the 17th century, only lasting a maximum of three solar cycles (around 30 years).
The conditions during this next predicted minimum will still be chilly: " It will be cold, but it will not be this ice age when everything is freezing like in the Hollywood films, Zharkova chuckled ". Jblu*******************************************************************************
And nobody is saying "ice age"... they are saying MINI "ice age". Of course it isn't a global, transocean freeze.
She's saying a freaking major cooling. You libs have completely missed the point.
Her model predicts MAJOR COOLING BECAUSE OF THE SUN's decrease in activity.
Now, the mmgw crowd - liberals - disputes the effects of the sun as a cause...and says the rising mm CO2 levels are causing the warming.
"CO2 is a poison" LOLLOL.
So, how the hell can it be cooling, libs, IF THE CO2 IS CLIMBING.
That's what I mean about knee jerk. She says the SUN IS GOING TO BE LESS ACTIVE - and
WE WILL HAVE A MAJOR GLOBAL COOLING.
So, how can you deny that the sun affects global warming? She's a freaking scientist,
and you libs are dismissing everything she does say, by bitching about what she doesn't.
Either answer this, or admit you're wrong. And, per her legit science, I am correct - activity of the sun
has a direct correlation to global temps on earth.
And, it's EXACTLY what I have said many times before - CO2 is rising...but gw doesn't...
that bites that liberal theory in the arse from the gitgo.
But do keep saying "climate change" instead of the old, decrepit, easily disproven "fact" of mmgw.
-
The equation of climate has more than one variable Cal...
No one has ever said the sun has no effect
-
Exactly what Woody said. Of course the sun has an affect on our temperature just like many other factors do. This mini ice age you are thinking of does not change the fact that our climate is warming and CO2 levels are a variable in that, just like solar activity is. 30 years of colder weather does not mean that we are not warming long term. Try not to be so short sighted.
-
Venus is a great example.
Mercury is closer to the sun, and since, according to you Cal, the sun is responsible for global warming and cooling wouldn't it make sense that Mercury would be hotter than Venus? Unless there were other variables that caused Venus to be hotter..hmmm like greenhouse gases? Venus' atmosphere is 90 times thicker than Earth's and is made of mostly, YOU GUESSED IT, CO2!
-
http://scienceline.ucsb.edu/getkey.php?key=3824
Whose the woodpecker now?
-
There is only one woodypeckerhead, for different reasons than being wrong.
I never said the sun was the ONLY cause of climate changing. That is utter nonsense.
This has been argued many times before, and just believe me - libs have bashed CO2
as THE reason we are supposed to have a "crisis" and we're all gonna die unless
we vote for Al Gore...
CO2 has been declared a "poison" many times on this board. It's plant food.
That's when I first brought up the destruction of the earth's rainforests.
I've posted legit graphs of the direct correlation between sun activity, and global temp.
It is THAT much a significant factor. CO2 must not be very significant, because it is cooling
in spite of the fact that CO2 is climbing. So, the libs' CO2 claim was silly from the gitgo.
I'm not saying rising CO2 is a good thing - I'm saying that over-industrialization, urbanization, paving,
building, major forest fires, volcano eruptions... there are a lot of reasons our global temp is
what it is.
It's really inane for libs to harp on suv's, cows farting, and not enough money taxed and spent, etc etc etc..
all that shows is the political intent of their "emphatic declarations of crisis".
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login