Iain Hall's SANDPIT

Home » AGW and climate change » Aztecs and Climate Change

Aztecs and Climate Change

will the Latte sippers be willing to do what is necessary to save the planet?

Will the Latte sippers be willing to do what is necessary to save the planet?

The way that climate change is argued is often rather inventive and repeatedly lacking in any proof of a causal relationship between the factors being considered, there is no more tenuous relationship than the one claimed for CO2 and temperature, the piece I quote below postulates a different cause for climate change and it also suggests a strategy that will undoubtedly be attractive to many AGW enthusiasts of the Latte sipping variety.

Statistical climate reconstruction techniques using the CLIVAR model produced accurate temperature anomalies for Middle America and Valley of Mexico region for various time periods. Several independent proxy data sets, including the invaluable new Codex data on sacrificial frequencies and corn yield, were used to derive estimates of regional spatial temperature covariance patterns (corrected for atmospheric absorption) and amplitude changes in them through time. A modified principal component analysis technique was used to optimise this combination of spatial and temporal information. Verification statistics obtained from data subsets confirmed the validity of the CLIVAR reconstructions.

The reconstructions confirm, on the balance of probabilities, that the major forcing agent determining regional temperature anomalies was the frequency of human sacrifice. Cooler periods, for example, showed an impressive causal connectivity with (lagging) high sacrificial numbers. Sacrificial frequency also directly influenced local rainfall patterns and corn yields.

There were other intriguing outcomes too. For example, young male sacrifices were statistically the largest percentile and tended to drive cooler weather, while female sacrifice produced warmer weather. The meteorological outcomes of child and animal sacrifice were less clear, and probably masked by the adult groups.

Recent research by David Lobell and Christopher Field concluded that wheat, maize and barley yields decline with increased temperatures. Annual global temperatures have increased by about 0.04 degrees since 1980, with even larger changes in some regions. This has had a negative impact on crop yields and produced serious losses.

Source

I would suggest though that if they are really genuine in their belief in AGW that the Latte sippers should all put their names down to be the new sacrifices on the altar of Gaia, and if they refuse then we will know that their faith is somewhat shallow.
Cheers Comrades
😉


233 Comments

  1. Alan Jackson says:

    Annual global temperatures have increased by about 0.04 degrees since 1980, with even larger changes in some regions.

    Thought you said that “global warming” was a myth Iain old son?

    😉

  2. PKD says:

    Yes – Iains obviously supporting the article he’s linked too, so he is also supporting the statement that the globe has indeed warmed up.

    Good to see Iain is finally accepting the reality!

  3. Iain Hall says:

    I see that you miss the point of the satire ,as usual, PKD 🙄

  4. PKD says:

    Oh, I’m sure I got it!

    And congrats again on accpeting the Earth has been warming up since 1980! 🙂

  5. Abu Chowdah says:

    But so what if the earth has warmed since 1980? (And I’m not saying it has). So what? What does that mean in the context of geological time? Nothing.

  6. Shawn Whelan says:

    When is PKD going to produce that AGW column?

    He better hurry up before the present cooling of the Earth shows him how foolish he was to fall for Algores scam.

    The Earth is cooling not warming.
    Crops here are two weeks behind schedule and it is still well below normal temps.
    Same thing in England for the third consecutive year.

  7. Iain Hall says:

    I think he is actually considering volunteering to be a sacrifice to Gaia Shawn so he has to get his affairs into order and therefore has no time to write his AGW post…

  8. Shawn Whelan says:

    Well he should hurry up before the earth turns into a solid ball of ice.

    Algore may look stupid over this but he did make at least a hundred million dollars. So he will have something to show for it unlike the sheople who blindly fell for the AGW scam.

  9. Iain Hall says:

    Speaking of the bountiful one I hear that he is coming downunder to a conference in Melbourne I wonder if PKD has got his ticket to see the profit?

  10. PKD says:

    T’is a business conference gig only I’m afraid Iain, so its rather unlikely. But if I do, at least I’ll be able to walk to it!

  11. PKD says:

    When is PKD going to produce that AGW column?

    When is Shawn going to find the evidence of Hansen saying we needed montonic growth for AGW to hold true? Oh Shawn, your love of pork pies is second only to Ramsay! lol

  12. JM says:

    Iain

    This science game is obviously a bit beyond you. Let me point out some obvious hints:-

    * Quadrant is not a scientific journal (at least not according to it’s own lights)
    * The author is a playright without credentials or background in climate science
    * His “paper” has not been cited by anyone else (at least according to CiteSeer)
    * His own references are largely to agriculture and animal husbandry not climatology
    * his “institute” lacks even a web site

    I think the poor ol’ Quadrant editors (and you) have been taken for a bit of a ride on this one.

    PKD’s challenge remains unmet.

  13. PKD says:

    PKD’s challenge remains unmet.

    Which one? There’s so many occiasions when Iain is asked the simplest of things and he goes silent that I’ve lost count!
    All it ever is is demand, demand, demand.

    Him and Shawn are like 5 year old kiddies on this – always demanding more sweets, yet never offering any of their own when asked for some…*sighs*

  14. Abu Chowdah says:

    JM – you have beclowned yourself.

  15. Iain Hall says:

    You are absolutely right Abu, JM can’t tell that both the Quadrant piece and my post about it are satirical even when I make that clear in the tagging for this post. Heck even PKD understood that 🙄

  16. PKD says:

    Actually I’d rather say that ALL your AGW pieces should be taken as satirical by default Iain – I don’t think you’ve ever put one sensible serious thing out about it! 🙂

  17. Iain Hall says:

    You are entitled to believe what you please PKD but the point is that JM has “beclowned” himself by believing that this post is entirely serious when it is clearly not.
    It does have a serious point to make though, and that is the folly of claiming connections between different facts when there is no established causal relationship at all.

  18. JM says:

    Iain

    My standards in satire are obviously somewhat higher than yours. Rote gibberish is not satire (no matter how many chortles you put on the laugh track).

    But if it’s your preferred mode of discourse, then so be it. Can’t say I’m surprised.

    As for your “serious point” it’s so asinine it’s not worth bothering with. And neither you nor Quadrant are capable of demonstrating it.

  19. Iain Hall says:

    JM
    A gentleman would have the good grace to admit that they have stuffed up.
    QED you can’t be a gentleman 🙄
    I write this blog with light and shade and if you can’t appreciate that after reading my blog for so long then you need to lighten up mate.

  20. Abu Chowdah says:

    Yes, that was a particularly lame little vanguard action. Fail.

  21. PKD says:

    The only thing thats ‘fail’ is Iains attempt to hedge his bet both ways – oh, its a satirical piece, but it also has a ‘serious point’. Except if you want to debate Iain on his ‘serious point’ he’ll just fall back to the ‘its a satirical piece, you need to lighten up mate’ guff.

    Now you’ve beclowned yourself Iain – bravo!

  22. Iain Hall says:

    Rot PKD
    You got the Joke so don’t spoil it by trying to defend JM who did not get it at all.
    I was not hedging any bets with this piece It is what it is and I just recognised the underlying purpose of the original joke, sadly you don’t seem to get that.

  23. PKD says:

    Doth protesteth too much Iain! 😉

  24. JM says:

    Iain, you truly are pathetic.

    Of course, I got the bloody ‘joke’. It I paid it any mind at all – ie. thought that you were being serious – I would have ridiculed it out of hand.

    Fact is, the thing is so bloody lame it deserves to be taken at it’s own pretense so it can slink off without being too embarrassed – you know the way a joke that falls flat is usually treated?

    It’s not at all funny, and ridicule is too good for it.

    However, a substantive response to PKD’s enquiries might just get a real debate going – if you’re up for it I mean.

  25. Iain Hall says:

    PKD
    You are right JM does protest too much

    JM
    if you keep wriggling like that someone may think that you are having an epileptic fit mate. So why don’t you calm down, take a few deep breaths and have a think about the hole you are making bigger for yourself with each subsequent comment.

    Your initial comment on this thread sought to demolish the scientific credibility of the source for my piece, Its there for all to see further up the page, Now it is rather apt that you began your argument based upon a faulty premise ( that I thought the Quadrant piece was really a straight piece about climate change) and you went straight for the “Iain does not know science” card. In doing so you made a fool of yourself now you are trying to change the focus of this thread to one where you feel that your science background will give you the upper hand. Well that is not how blogging works matey. If you want to direct the focus of discussion then you do the hard yards and write your own blog where you can chose any topic you please to try to inspire discussion.
    Tell you what I’ll make the same offer that I made to PKD way back in 2007 (and which he is still to take up despite much goading from me) why don’t you write me a guest post about why you believe in AGW and I’ll put it up here in my blog, shall we say 2000 words? Illustrate it with any graphs or pictures of your choice and apart from adjusting formatting and appearance (if necessary) I will post whatever you send me. Can I be fairer than that?
    Are YOU up for that?
    My email is on the front page of the blog.

  26. PKD says:

    Doth meant ‘you’ Iain – I was referring to ‘toi’!

    Strange, I thought your knowledge of olde English would’ve been much better, after all your AGW knowledge is back in the Medieval ages too!!!

  27. Iain Hall says:

    PKD
    my knowledge of the Bard is pretty good mate but you mucked up the quote

    ” Methinks she doth protest to much” which is from Hamlet
    and it is not from “olde English” or from anything from “Medieval ages” either.
    If you are going to try that sort of thing get it right Man!
    Doth does not mean what you think it does PKD
    v. Archaic
    A third person singular present tense of do1.

    source

  28. PKD says:

    Heh – and you have the cheek to accuse lefties of being humourless?

    Although your little trip to WIkipedia has proven something – you *can* go and get evidence to back your argument up…when it suits you!

    I guess this shows how much you know that you have no evidence to back up your wilder AGW claims when you go silent…

  29. Abu Chowdah says:

    It’s a satirical piece but it also has a serious point.

    The serious point is that AGW believers, like the Aztecs, are a moronic self-destructive cult that wants to disappear up their own bum on the basis of incomplete advice and knowledge.

    Now have a wonderful Sunday, PKD, my obtuse little compadre.

  30. Iain Hall says:

    PKD

    Although your little trip to WIkipedia has proven something – you *can* go and get evidence to back your argument up…when it suits you!

    Certainly, when it suits me .

    I guess this shows how much you know that you have no evidence to back up your wilder AGW claims when you go silent…

    And where is your Pro AGW piece that I have been waiting for since 2007 PKD?
    Hmm cue more prevarication from you….

  31. JM says:

    Iain, it seems my now jaundiced view of your intelligence and wit may be truer than I thought.

    My original statement: “I think the poor ol’ Quadrant editors (and you) have been taken for a bit of a ride on this one.”

    Care to think a little about that a little bit?

  32. Iain Hall says:

    Do you really need me to deconstruct your original comment and show you the error of your ways JM?

    Heaven in a hand basket man you are desperate to “win” aren’t you?

  33. Abu Chowdah says:

    Someone throw that poor land lubber a life preserver!

  34. JM says:

    Iain Hall does Derrida!

    This’ll be entertaining. Have at it, my man.

  35. Iain Hall says:

    JM

    This science game is obviously a bit beyond you. Let me point out some obvious hints:-

    Your opening salvo is all about saying that this piece is not “science”, well I NEVER assumed it was, so your first assumption, that I mistakenly think that it is science starts you off on the wrong foot.

    * Quadrant is not a scientific journal (at least not according to it’s own lights)

    Where do I claim otherwise? (I’ll give you a hint I don’t)

    * The author is a play(w)right without credentials or background in climate science

    I did not even check on the authors credentials because I recognised straight away that this was a piece of satire.and taged my post accordingly

    * His “paper” has not been cited by anyone else (at least according to CiteSeer)

    So what? It is YOU who is working from the faulty assumption here I’m actually surprised that you needed to check 🙄

    * His own references are largely to agriculture and animal husbandry not climatology

    See my comment above

    * his “institute” lacks even a web site

    Well as this obviously is a humorous fiction rather than the fraud that you think it is, creating a website would be a bit over the top.

    I think the poor ol’ Quadrant editors (and you) have been taken for a bit of a ride on this one.

    I think that the Quadrant editors knew exactly what they were doing when they published this piece they were taking the piss out of AGW true believers just like you JM, and that is exactly why I got enough of a hoot out of it to make it the beginning of a post here. You are clearly assuming that they and I have been duped into believing that it is all real and genuine .
    It is just as clear that you have no appreciation of deadpan humour even when it is flagged with a tag that says it is NOT serious.

  36. JM says:

    Iain, you disappoint me.

    Nothing on structure? No sign/signifier? Nothing on semiotics? Not even overuse of the word ‘discourse’?

    I thought you were going to do Derrida, not basic grammar. I wasted my popcorn.

  37. Iain Hall says:

    Derider was your assumption not mine JM
    Likewise I have criticised your content and the assumptions behind that content rather than your grammar.

    So it seems that you have blown it yet again.

  38. Abu Chowdah says:

    Don’t waste any energy on this tarbaby, Iain.

  39. Shawn Whelan says:

    If we are suffering under terrible global warming why is it so cold.?
    As it continues to get colder I will enjoy laughing at the AGW zealots and curse the cold weather. I want my global warming back. I does appear that nature trumps the scientists who are as wrong as the economists were.
    Could it be the Sun? Or the cold PDO? Or the La Nina? Or the cool cycle in the Atlantic?
    Does Algore get to keep the $100 million he made? Do Algores useful idiots hide or take their lumps?

    Crops Under Stress as Temperatures fall

    “For the second time in little over a year, it looks as though the world may be heading for a serious food crisis, thanks to our old friend “climate change”. In many parts of the world recently the weather has not been too brilliant for farmers. After a fearsomely cold winter, June brought heavy snowfall across large parts of western Canada and the northern states of the American Midwest. In Manitoba last week, it was -4ºC. North Dakota had its first June snow for 60 years.

    There was midsummer snow not just in Norway and the Cairngorms, but even in Saudi Arabia. At least in the southern hemisphere it is winter, but snowfalls in New Zealand and Australia have been abnormal. There have been frosts in Brazil, elsewhere in South America they have had prolonged droughts, while in China they have had to cope with abnormal rain and freak hailstorms, which in one province killed 20 people.”
    Snip

    Crops Under Stress as Temperatures fall

    So far, June’s chill is one for the records

    “The cloudy, chilly and rainy open to June here has been the talk of the town. So far this June is running more than 12 degrees cooler than last year, and the clouds, rain and chilly lake winds have been persistent. The average temperature at O’Hare International Airport through Friday has been only 59.5 degrees: nearly 7 degrees below normal and the coldest since records there began 50 years ago.

    More bad weather is on the way Saturday with a cold rain expected to linger through the bulk of the morning. Rainfall could be heavy — especially north of the city, which would be a reversal of Thursday’s deluge that targeted the southern suburbs.”
    snip
    http://weblogs.wgntv.com/chicago-weather/tom-skilling-blog/2009/06/chilly-junes-2009-open-one-for-2.html

  40. Shawn Whelan says:

    Oh Shawn, your love of pork pies is second only to Ramsay! lol

    What’s a pork pie?

  41. Iain Hall says:

    Shawn
    “pork pies” is rhyming slang for “lies”

  42. Shawn Whelan says:

    “pork pies” is rhyming slang for “lies”

    Did Algore think that up?

    Let’s give PKD a break and allow him to write his column on “As the Earth cools”. I would like an explanation on why the Earth is undergoing such cooling during this manmade AGW.

    We must be fair, pork pies and such.

    As the Earth cools you must wonder what Algore will do with his 100 million dollars and what will PKD do with his crow dinner. Think about it Algore gets a 100 million and PKD gets? Very embarrassed?

  43. JM says:

    Ahhh Shawn, just in time.

    Can I get your comment on this: http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_timeseries.png

    Sea ice extent is now running neck-n-neck with the record lows of 2007. Hardly “storming back” eh?

    Perhaps while you’re waiting for PKD you could get a reply in “While the Ice Melts”?

  44. PKD says:

    And I can assure you Gordon, err, Shawn, that I will get an AGW article done before you demonstrate Hansen saying we needed monotonic growth for AGW to be true! 🙂

    Yeah, I suspect Shawn (possibly Canada’s most hypocritical geologist?) will be silent on NSIDC data now the ice is back to 2007s record low. Although I’ll be surprised if we beat it at the end of the melt, but Shawn’s classic knee-jerk in April that we were back to average was still oh so premature.

    Tell you what, call me when the graph has been over average for a few years Shawn to reverse the long-term trend ok? And stop embarrasing yourself in the meantime!

  45. Shawn Whelan says:

    It is very mysterious JM. The NSIDC switched sensors and the melt rate went wild. You don’t suppose the scientists are fudging the data so they don’t look totally foolish? Let’s face it Hansen and the gang at NASA are communists first and scientists second.

    Look at the Arctic Roos graph and it shows totally different. JAXA has for some reason quit updating.

    With the extreme cold in the North and throughout Canada this year I expect the end of the melt to result in much more ice than last year.

    Look at this University of Bremen mapping and you will see the Arctic melting proponents are in a heap of trouble.

    Compare the level of ice at June 9 for yourself.
    From the University of Bremen.

  46. Shawn Whelan says:

    Quit porky pieing us PKD and write that article.

    Like I said we will let you write it about “Global Cooling” since it is to late for any sane person to actually believe the AGW myth.

    Sane being the key word.

  47. PKD says:

    Hahaha, I love your ‘modus operandi’ Shawn (you may need to look that term up seeing how you think Al Gore invented the pork pie term…).

    …Can’t debate the science (I suppose you have zero evidence that Hansen is a communist – we’ll chalk that up as another Shawn LIE if so) so just keep on obsessing about something I agreed with Iain that has nothing to do with you.

    Pathetic. Like I said if YOU find proof Hansen stated we need monotonic growth for AGW to hold true, then tell you what – I’ll do a post within 7 days. Can’t say fairer than that. Otherwise shut up about it (or preferrably admit your lie, the kudos will do you good) and start debating science not the lies you keep resorting to.

  48. Shawn Whelan says:

    Like I said if YOU find proof Hansen stated we need monotonic growth for AGW to hold true, then tell you what

    That is already well worn out.

    Are you saying Hansen predicted AGW would cause the Earth to cool ?

    Who would fall for that? I would hope even a lefty would see through that.

  49. PKD says:

    I didn’t say anything about Hansen – but you DID.

    Lets see…you claimed Hansen said every year needed to be warmer than the last (monotonic growth).
    You then provided a link to Hansens graphs – none of which backed your ‘claim’ up in any way.
    You then went silent for a rather long time.

    And now your back, resorting to more of your lies. Show me where Hansen is claimed he is a communist Shawn.

    Dont be shy now…

  50. JM says:

    “It is very mysterious …”

    What’s mysterious Shawn? That sources you’ve previously claimed as the bees knees – NSIDC and JAXA – no longer back up your ludicrously childish views (if they ever did)?

    Or that you abandon them to cherry pick other sources (University of Bremen) at the first sign of “betrayal”?

    The only mystery here Shawn is why you persist in believing fantasies in the face of reality.

    Real hard-nuts don’t carry guns, rant about “socialists” or accuse people they disagree with of being “communists”.

    Real hard-nuts face up to the facts. Whatever they might be.

    And deal with the consequences and do whatever is needed to fix the problems.

    Are you up for that Shawn?

  51. Shawn Whelan says:

    PKD
    Nothing Hansen predicted is matching what is happening.

    Or perhaps you have some top secret Hansen prediction that shows the Earth will enter into a cooling trend?

    Anybody with a teaspoonful of brains can figure out Hansen is a communist.

    The teaspoonful of brains may be a problem here.

  52. Shawn Whelan says:

    JM you know nothing. Just where do you think Bremen gets it data from?

    Your technical knowledge on this subject is very limited.

    I only accuse communists of being communists.
    What is a real hard nut in your world JM? Cinderella?

    Sorry to tell you boys but the Earth is rapidly cooling and you will end up looking very foolish.

  53. JM says:

    Shawn

    Graciously admitting error is possible you know. It is usually taken as a sign of maturity and integrity and reflects well on the person who is capable of it.

  54. Shawn Whelan says:

    OK JM

    I agree.

    I am waiting JM, go ahead.

  55. PKD says:

    So are we Shawn, so are we. Is Hansen a communist, hmmm???

    If you had even a microscopic idea of what Hasens graphs were showing you’d know they all allow for some years to be cooler than the previous. Its the trend that counts.

    I’m sure that will go in one ear and out the other somehow…

  56. Phill says:

    PKD. Get with the program the earth is cooling dontcha know?

    In fact last night I has to wear socks to bed, which when you live in Perth as I do, that is very unusual.I see they are planning a future ski resort near Denpasar in Bali.

    My wife and I have been told to book early before the rush so to speak.

  57. Shawn Whelan says:

    Post the evidence PKD.

    Where did Hansen predict the Earth to go into a rapid cooling phase?

    You don’t here much about Australia. Is it in a record heat wave or something like that. Canada has for the most part seen very rapid cooling. You guys are on the ground there and I would like to know.

    Could it be the Sun after all? Who would have thunk it.

  58. Shawn Whelan says:

    Phill, I am curious.

    Do you actually have any knowledge of the subject?

  59. PKD says:

    Phill, I am curious.

    Do you actually have any knowledge of the subject?

    More than you it would appear Shawn, more than you…

    So Shawn – any final proof Hansen is a communist?
    Or shall we conclude you made up another false claim?

  60. Phill says:

    “Do you actually have any knowledge of the subject?”

    Shawn in a word NO.But then, neither do you, or Iain, or PKD, or any other layman that contributes to this blog.What we all have, is an opinion, nothing else.

    Most of the worlds scientists, now I’ll repeat that for you, most of the worlds scientists, by a country mile, or if you like 99.9% of them, believe that there is a connection between global warming and the burning of fossil fuels by mankind.

    Nothing you can say or contribute to this debate can change that fact.You can provide links to all the so called denialist experts you like, they are all of the conservative bent, and are political opportunists, or have interests by the way of money making enterprises to keep the “Status Quo” of said denial.

    As I have said previously, I don’t know if global warming is a reality,a bit like when I go for a check up on my heart, or my bollocks are swollen from overwork, or my penis is black from getting it caught in my zipper, I don’t go to Iain Hall, PKD, or your good self to get a prognosis, I go to some bastard that is qualified, to get an expert opinion.

    Now as a wild guess, what you and I, and Iain, PKD, and indeed the Queen of England know about global warming would fit on the back of a postage stamp.At the end of the day, I am willing to bet on the experts, I mean, your denial of what is becoming clearer by the day, is mainly treated by most sane people with derision, and most sane people think you denialists are all half wits.And I gotta tell ya looking at your contribution to the debate I am starting to believe it.

  61. Iain Hall says:

    Phill
    just a short comment to point out that even the most ardent Warministas do not make the very bold claim that “99.9%” of scientists support the alarmist nonsense about “global warming” as you do if you add up the entirety of those who qualify as a “scientist” and compare that to the number who advocate the AGW hypothesis you will find that the actual number is very much less than your “99.9%”.

  62. Abu Chowdah says:

    “Most of the worlds scientists, now I’ll repeat that for you, most of the worlds scientists, by a country mile, or if you like 99.9% of them, believe that there is a connection between global warming and the burning of fossil fuels by mankind.”

    You’re either retarded or a liar. Which is it?

  63. David says:

    I have always agreed with Iain on this issue.

    No one doubts that ‘man’ is destroying the planet, by industrialisation, fossil fuel burning and (pardon the french Iain), cow farts.

    Just as a side note, did you guys know that cow farts make up one of the top four or five, on the list of greenhouse gas expellents ?

    What are you suggesting, if anything Abu ? Do we, as was portrayed in the final episode of Battlestar Gallactica, get all our technology, put it on massive barges, and send it hurtling into the sun, and return to the Dark Ages ?

    The population of this planet, since industrialisation, has multiplied ten plus fold. That population needs food, fuel, as well as now, a need to fulfill our love for “gadgets”, and the electrickery to power them.

    Do we all become vegetarians, as Luscious Alicia suggests in one of the above posts ? Would take more than some lady (even as sexy as that one), to turn me off meat, or anything else for that matter.

    We have few alternatives. They is solar or nuclear. Neither are, as yet, efficient enough for us to wean ourselves off oil. I would be the first to celebrate our relinquishment or dependency on oil, and other fossil fuels. I would love to see those fat, money hungry war lords of the middle east, reduced to towing their Rolls Royce around with camels.

    There are just too many variations in the equation to figure out one definitive cause. The burning of fossil fuels is just one. You have to include such things as massive degradation of the world’s forests, increase in livestock numbers, and of course, the massive increase of the world’s population over the last couple of hundred years. Those are just a few ?

    Fossil fuel burning is just one of the many causes of (supposed) AGW. There very may well be a connection between AGW and the burning of fossil fuels Abu, but it is not the major, and only cause. To suggest that it is, is short sighted, narrow minded, and lacks the ‘scientific FACTS” to substantiate that hypothesis.

    It is about time, the scientists concerned, started to look at ALL the data out there, and stopped pandering to the Green movement, which finances these bullshit studies.

  64. PKD says:

    You raised some interesting points there David, more than either Abu or even Shawn have managed in heaven knows how long.

    Although I’d disagree with you that sceintists are pandering to the green movement. All the options are being considered, otherwise some scientists wouldn’t be putting out non-AGW papers would they? But certainly the best theory to explain the evidence we have is still that man-made emissions has a contributing effect to GW. To suggest greenhouse gases don’t have any significant effect is just absurd…

  65. David says:

    Short and sweet,
    I agree.

    Until all the evidence is in, and the “sucking up” to all the lobby groups from the scientific community ceases, i.e. the facts, and only the facts, are presented, we are all “pissing into the wind”

  66. Phill says:

    David, I will only reply to your post and Iains, as far as the other causes I totally agree with you, it is a combination of all of them.

    And I repeat what I said that’s 99.9999%,99.999%,99.999% of the worlds experts believe global warming is a reality.

    It is becoming clearer by the day to even some of the more loony fringe on the right that it exists.Most scientists worth their salt are so convinced now that they will no longer debate the reality, only the seriousness of the situation.

    It is a strange phenomena that right wingers have a penchant for the ridiculous.They are the same people who believe the landing on the moon was a Hollywood mock up, the government is building camps(fema) to imprison people, and AIDS was created by a government run laboratory.I could go on about area 52 and aliens U.F.O.’s the list of the kookiness of the right is inexhaustible.

    If any of you with your kooky opinions on G.W. was to enter a debate with say a James Lovelock, they would call the gentlemen in white coats to take you away, you would be regarded as a danger to society.

  67. David says:

    This guy has an interesting take on the argument ? :

  68. David says:

    How did I do that ? 🙂

  69. PKD says:

    Most scientists worth their salt are so convinced now that they will no longer debate the reality, only the seriousness of the situation.

    Well said. It’s time for even the denialists to move on from the ‘ there’s no proof it exists’ and just debate much much of an effectis it going to have? It’s important to determine early on (yes, even if it means ‘modelling’ Iain) how much of an issue it will become, to know how much should be done about it…and to do it with a level head on not with the twin extremes of alarmism and denialism!

  70. Phill says:

    David my own opinion is the same and always has been, doing nothing is not an option.I will not let the rantings of the denialist destroy the future of my grand children.

  71. David says:

    The guy in the video does present the argument as it currently stands tho Phil.

    I agree, that we have severe problems, and we, as a planet, are making it worse. By doing nothing, we are all sentencing our future generations to an unlivable planet. BUT, there are so many whacky theories out there, that at the moment, all that is happening, is that the argument (that needs to be out there), is being buried in minutia. Until that ceases, we are all fumbling in the dark

  72. Phill says:

    ” to know how much should be done about it…and to do it with a level head on not with the twin extremes of alarmism and denialism! ”

    Yes well said PKD. Most sane people need no further convincing the evidence is in.The rights whole response to this crisis is the same as any problem mankind faces.They still believe the forests that have and are being destroyed can be replaced in time to save the planet.That the fish in the sea are inexhaustible, just like any other of the finite resources, etc, etc, etc.

    Even debating this issue with them, when one considers the consequences of doing nothing, is really wasting our own resources mainly time, which could be better spent helping to fix the problem.

  73. Phill says:

    David again you are correct, however wacky theories! The right has always had a mortgage on these.

    From the lefts perspective, if I am committing some heresy by wanting a planet that has clean air and water and a sustainable future for my grand kids, makes me wacky.

    I wear the wacky badge with pride.

  74. Shawn Whelan says:

    It is not warming it is cooling.
    We have entered a natural cooling cycle. Time will show I am right.(the satellite data already does)
    That is the big problem for the Algores of the world.

    And it looks like the cooling is starting to accelerate.

    We have well below normal temps as does Europe and I expect this Winter is going to be a doozy of a cold one if the Sun stays quiet and likely it will.

    One more thing NASA was total wrong at predicting was the Sun cycle. They have been totally 100% wrong with several predictions.

    More and more scientists are bailing out of the AGW scam. They see what is coming. The rest will just look foolish as the Earth cools. I will get a good chuckle out of it. PKD will get to eat crow.

    Phill —if you know nothing about the suybject don’t you think it would be better to STFU? You know opening your mouth and looking like a fool and all that.

    The truth about the temperature.

    Click to access NOAAMAY.pdf

  75. Shawn Whelan says:

    DD

    That guy is not taking into account the possibility of an Ice Age. We should also spend trillions we don’t have on Ice Age insurance?

    Or the sky is falling insurance?

  76. Shawn Whelan says:

    So Shawn – any final proof Hansen is a communist?
    Or shall we conclude you made up another false claim?

    I would think even a leftard would be able to recognize that Hansen is a Commie.

  77. PKD says:

    the rantings of the denialist

    …and speaking of which, here comes Shawn, right on cue!

    Bold as brass, pretending that the requests to prove his outlandish Hansen claims never happened, by spewing out some more manure! Bravo Shawn!

  78. PKD says:

    I would think even a leftard would be able to recognize that Hansen is a Commie.

    Aah – so you’ve no evidence then?

    So yet another Whelan lie on AGW…:(

    Hey Shawn, given your old claim to be a qualified geologist, how is it you’ve not once (in my memory at least) managed to talk with the benefit of your ‘expsertise’ about any of the geological evidence on AGW – for or against?

    Is it because you’re not really a geologist after all???

  79. Phill says:

    “One more thing NASA was total wrong at predicting was the Sun cycle. They have been totally 100% wrong with several predictions.”

    I mean what would NASA know? Shawn you must have two dicks just nobody, but nobody could be a silly as you pulling one.Your ego and your fantasy’s about what you know about G.W. is only exceeded by your arrogant rudeness.In most circles, you would be derided as an A class moron.

    If you are a geologist, I will eat shit on Hay St Perth naked with a large banana hanging out of my arse. It is more likely you are a garbologist, for a tool like you, that is code for a rubbish collector.

    If a person is not a scientist or an academic qualified on this subject they are like me, a layman with another opinion. Your opinion and mine and four bucks will buy you a cup of coffee, in my case a nice Latte.

  80. Shawn Whelan says:

    Aah – so you’ve no evidence then?

    So yet another Whelan lie on AGW…:(

    Hey Shawn, given your old claim to be a qualified geologist, how is it you’ve not once (in my memory at least) managed to talk with the benefit of your ‘expsertise’ about any of the geological evidence on AGW – for or against?
    I think I have.

    Like we are in an interglacial period and the glacial cold periods last much longer than the warm interglacier period. Many think the Ice Ages(and yes they do repeat) are caused by Milankovitch cycles. (the relationship of the Earth to the Sun. So we will have another Ice Age in a relatively short time on the geological scale and we may now see the actual affect of the lack of Sunspots on the Earths temperature. There is a relationship between lack of Sunspots and the cold Maunder Minimum period.

    Phill–You are a buffoon.
    Why do you have such a great desire to act like a moron? At least you do a bangup job of it.

    PKD–When the Earth goes into this cool spell I will supply you one free crow dinner.

  81. Shawn Whelan says:

    Phill

    You still make me think of the Wizard of OZ.
    The little man behind the curtain with the big mouth.

  82. Phill says:

    Very good Shawn all your bullshit lifted straight off the net, you are so clever.It is you who is the moron, and when you are playing the insult game find your own, there are no prizes for seconds.

    What you know about global warming would fit on the back of a postage stamp, so please spare me and every other person who is on to your blather, your Shawn Wheeler intellectual routine.You wouldn’t know I was up you until I pulled out and a wind blew up your arse.

    All you dicks that think you know better than main stream scientists and other academics, just enforces the view of others like me who don’t know, and rely on experts for a semblance of the truth, what precocious wankers you all are.

  83. David says:

    C’mon guys, let’s get back to the post, it is getting interesting ? 😉

    Shawn,
    “We have entered a natural cooling cycle. Time will show I am right.(the satellite data already does):

    That is a big call, and yet to be proven, either way ? I know there is “some” information out there to corroborate your statement, , but it may be a very early call saying that we are entering a cooling phase. I think a quit chat to everyone downunder, about last summer, may bring a few unexpected responses ? That data could be read, either way.

    If you are over 50 like I am, we have seen some horrendous summers here in Auz. Last summer was just one of them, and in my memory, has to be right up there, to being one of, if not the worst that I have ever seen.

    What generally happens after a hot summer ? Remember back to the last one ? We usually get a bloody cold, and wet winter. Hmm, seems like that is exactly what is occurring.

    In so far as the Sun Spot Cycle ? Sorry mate, that is/has nothing to do with the earth’s weather. We have had this argument before. All it does, is affect the earth’s ionosphere, a good fifty or so miles up, far higher than the weather systems. Every now and again, we have a sunspot cycle that is slow to pick up. We have just gone through one of the longest solar minimums on record. Nothing to be alarmed about, that has occurred elsewhere in history. We are out of that minimum now, with sunspots being spotted on a daily basis, and they reckon that the next solar peak will be about 2013 or nearabouts. So, Mother Nature continues on her merry way, totally oblivious of the scientific cranks, that suggested that there were not going to be any more sunspots ? That is what makes this entire argument tough to deal with. We are dealing with so many dickheads out there, that are supposed to be experts, with PhDs, that make these statements, that don’t use legitimate research to back up their outlandish claims (on BOTH sides of the argument), and their arguments are shot down in flames so easily, that it makes anything they say, difficult to believe, and cannot be seen as credible. It is amazing to see what they say, when a fat “study grant cheque” is waved in front of their noses ?

    I consider myself pretty “centre”, if anything, perhaps a little more “left” than Iain, but we both (at least if I am reading Iain correctly ?), have not been convinced, of the impending doom.

    My personal opinion, is that global warming is a myth. Everything I have learned in science, (and got to admit, that ain’t too much ?), suggests that if you put a sock on your foot, if the foot was cold before the sock, then without heat generation, your foot will get colder. If the atmosphere becomes that polluted, that the earth no longer receives warmth from the Sun, then a cooling phase is what will result. On the reverse side of the argument, states that if we keep shoving co2, and hot air up through massive smoke stacks, then warming will occur ? Ian’s posting, of the polar bear, on one solitary piece of ice, is a scary image, but one commonly used by the ‘warmanistas” to alarm us. IT WORKED !.

    I am sorry Phil, I am like you. I am yet to be convinced either way. Until scientists on both sides of the argument, come up with data, and conclusions that make sense, instead of inducing societal paranoia, then for my money, my original hypotheses still stands. We are stuffing up the planet, and until we wean ourselves, off our dependency on polluting oil products, then we are doomed, no argument there at all.

  84. Abu Chowdah says:

    “And I repeat what I said that’s 99.9999%,99.999%,99.999% of the worlds experts believe global warming is a reality.”

    That’s not what you said before. What you said was that that global warming was a result of fossil fuels.

    You’re a liar or moron. Which is it?

  85. Phill says:

    David, I agree with you in part, at the end of the day unless you are a Buddhist Monk and live in a cave on white rice and water, our lives in the west are controlled by bona fide scientists, who governments of all stripes get their advice from.

    If you think I am going to take any notice of some blogger and yes that goes for me in the other direction for the denialists, above a bona fide scientist on this issue, this is tantamount to madness.

    As for the solar sun spots I am a licensed ham radio operator, and no I am not going to put my VK call sign on here. So the comments about sun spots is a load of tripe, you have mentioned it so I assume x signals mayhaps?

    As for government grants, give me a break Dave what about the lobbyists for big business who don’t even draw a breath, when they insult peoples intelligence with a load of bullshit.

    The evidence for G.W. is over whelming, where you find the doubters you will find the “show me the money” brigade every time.Of course conservatives are not only in denial about G.W. they believe the planet is inexhaustible.Not bad eh? it’s been here for millions of years, and we have wrecked it in the best part of two hundred. To deny this salient fact is arrant abject nonsense.

    As far as a myth well, putting a man on the moon is bullshit, I’ll supply you with a thousand links to prove it.
    Nonsense right?Of course it is.

    Enough already with the G.W. debate.

  86. Phill says:

    Sabu go away.

  87. Abu Chowdah says:

    Climate change is real.

    The belief that it is caused by CO2 is bullshit.

  88. Abu Chowdah says:

    A snide dig again, Phooll?

  89. Phill says:

    What part of go away Sabu don’t you understand.

    As for a snide remark!!! Oh yea Sabu I mean after you call me,
    1. A liar
    2. A retard.

    I mean what I’m supposed to feel all warm and fuzzy ? Why don’t you come around and screw my daughter, I’ll make you a nice cup of Latte whilst you’re on the job.Maybe my wife will give you a blow job, of course she would have to be careful not to exhale to much CO’2 wouldn’t she? Then after you have a shit maybe I’ll come around and lick the dags off your arse.How do like your steak Sabu? Or is that curry. I wouldn’t want to culturally offend you now would I .

    Oh I’m sorry CO’2 doesn’t cause global warming according to the thoughts of chairman Sabu.

    Yea of course, and if my aunty had balls she would have been my uncle.

    As I said GO AWAY!

  90. David says:

    Phil,
    I am also a VK, and the argument on no more sunspots, was not mine, rather, an article Iain put up some months ago, by some crack pot PhD. (see here : http://carboncreditsau.wordpress.com/2008/08/30/activity-is-quiet-on-the-sunspot-front/ )

    As for your rebuttal of my argument on Sun Spots, which part are you refuting ? The “no more sunspots” or the “sunspot – weather” correlation or lack thereof ?

    My argument regarding the sunspots, was put there purely to show, that some wanker scientist, had been given a grant, to come up with the mind blowing conclusion, that we were not going to see any more sunspots, ever. That is why, I have very little faith in what these eggheads say. That goes for scientists on BOTH sides of the argument.

    The are fed and clothed by big business, and government, and don’t tell me their final conclusions are not swayed by the cheque book ? Pulease !

    Are you telling me that scientists, that are still trying to ascertain damage caused by the Exxon Valdez disaster, that are employed by Exxon, aren’t telling/reassuring the world, that now the clean up is nearly completed, that everything will return to normal, without permanent damage ?

    There is serious money to be made, surprisingly enough, from Global Warming. Shitloads of it. Until that is taken out of the equation, I have very little faith, in anything those white hats wear, until they show me the proof. They can’t, because it is not there yet.

  91. Abu Chowdah says:

    So, you can dish out the snide remarks, but can’t take ’em. Your last post is completely florid. I wouldn’t have written those comments about my family even under pseudonym.

    Once a Phooll, always a Phooll.

    Nonetheless, your moronic claim that 99.9% of the world’s scientists agree that warming is caused by CO2 is grade A crap.

    Now why don’t you toddle off and read Plimer’s book. At least then you might be informed.

  92. PKD says:

    Just ignore Abu Phil – the guy is a bit of an abusive troll I’m afraid…

    The belief that it is caused by CO2 is bullshit.

    I mean I dont suppose you have any proof of that do you Abu? It is true because, because Abd SAYS its true!

    *sigh*

  93. Phill says:

    Sorry David you must have misunderstood me, sunspots have nothing to do with G.W.

    The radio is being affected as you know,I have been in the middle of Oz about three weeks ago, lousy. A bit of activity on 40 mtrs that was it.Unless it’s changed in the last two weeks (I haven’t been on air) All the other H.F. frequency’s were fairly sporadic.

    David I wouldn’t believe anything any scientists working for Exon told me, that’s the point I’m trying to make.

    As far as proof David soon it will I am sure, all be revealed.Sooner or later governments will make a firm decision one way or tother.They will go for the better safe than sorry outcome.

    Until a firm consensus is arrived at, I’m going with the majority.I may be wrong, but that’s the difference between the other denialists and I. I concede I may be wrong, but I don’t pretend to be an expert, like some.Who are no more qualified to make an opinion than I.

    Sabu what you may put on the net doesn’t worry me in the slightest.My family think my computer is another T.V. they don’t use it.

    As for Pilmer,Smilmer.Criillmer,or indeed Trilllmer, I could give a F.F. he is just one scientist.Now why don’t you toddle off and take a nice long walk, down a very short jetty.

  94. Iain Hall says:

    PKD

    I mean I don’t suppose you have any proof of that do you Abu?

    The point is simply that there is neither proof either for or against the proposition PKD there is simply not enough empirical data, no matter how many times you genuflect to Al Gore or Tim Flannery that ain’t going to change.

  95. Phill says:

    “Just ignore Abu Phil – the guy is a bit of an abusive troll I’m afraid…”

    Hey PKD I don’t take Sabu’s comments or Shawn Wheelan”s serious.They are just sport to while away a boring rainy day.

    Common dog tells me, we will be vindicated in our beliefs on G.W. and it wont be much longer before we find out.

    I know Wheelan and Sabu are just kids, you can tell from their comments.The conservative mindset is dying a death slowly but surely, nobody is seriously buying what they’re selling any more.Even when the toxin of conservatism returns,and it will from time to time, it will be a lot different than the nonsense we experienced under John Howard.

  96. David says:

    Top end of 80/75 is still pretty good Phill. Sunspots don’t mean squat up there really.
    Sorry I misunderstood you.

    I first saw that posting, (by Iain), read that article by that “expert”, and totally lost my lunch. I couldn’t believe, that someone, supposedly university educated, could come up with that sort of dribble. What a waste of space. All follow up articles, that I have seen, as well as Iain pointing out, that the guy concerned, has gone astray, with “crank” embroidered on the back of his white coat ?

    As said a million times, there is no doubt in the world, that we are destroying the planet by our misuse. Would have to be an all out nutter, not to see that.

    The solution will come, whether or not it will be in time ? We will all have to wait and see I suppose.

  97. Phill says:

    “Top end of 80/75 is still pretty good Phill. Sunspots don’t mean squat up there really.”

    Yea it comes and goes, got a few good short path contacts to Italy whilst away, not much else, most activity over this way lately on local VHF. Starting to lose a bit of interest in it haven’t been up to me club for yonks.My yagi is stuck facing east it hasn’t been used in so long.Mostly mobile now with QSO whilst driving.

    Yep Dave we are destroying the planet of that there is no doubt, and it aint getting any better, any time soon..Of course now we have the added problems like Iran and Nth Korea, both of which are run by certified nutters.God knows where that’s all gonna end?G.W. may not be a problem at all in the scheme of things if that all blows up?

    Interesting few years if not months ahead.

  98. Shawn Whelan says:

    DD,

    What are you disputing about the Sunspots.

    The lack of them or their affect on the Earth’s temperature?

    Many scientists believe the Sunspots affect the Earth’s temperature and the Little Ice Age occurred during a time of low sunspot activity.

    A lack of Sunspots corresponds very closely to the coldest times in recent Earth history.

    http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/the-eddy-minimum.png?w=510&h=180

  99. Shawn Whelan says:

    Just ignore Abu Phil – the guy is a bit of an abusive troll I’m afraid…

    You must be desperate to team up with that foul mouthed PHOOL.

  100. David says:

    Phil,
    Try 75 early your late afternoons. Short window l/p into Eu.

    Shawn
    You may have a point, I have not seen too much evidence regarding the correlation. I have been studying this stuff, since the late sixties, so I think I know a little bit.

    The cycle comes and goes every (average) 8 to 14 or so years, and there is no evidence yet, to show a correlation between earth’s weather patterns and sunspot cycles. The sunspot cycle only affects the ionisation of the upper layers of the atmosphere. We are talking, up to a couple of hundred miles. The E, D, F layers, well above the earth’s weather patterns of two three miles.

    Your relationship between low sunspot cycles or numbers, and the evidence you provide, in my opinion, is merely coincidence. Ice ages last hundreds, even thousands of years. Solar minimums only on average last about three years, until the new cycle kicks off again, as is the case now. The wanker that we are criticising, the author of the piece cited above, suggested, that there would never be any more sunspots, and as such we were all doomed.

    What a pack of opionated, un researched, and un qualified dribble. The new sunspot cycle has begun, and small sunspots are again being seen on the sun’s surface, as of the last couple of weeks. So, there goes that tosser’s entire research grant ?
    Agreed, we are in one of the most sustained minimums on record, but being nature driven, that is the way it goes sometimes. As said, proven, that new sunspots are being seen, and checked, to ensure they are not from the last cycle, and it has been proven that these are new sunspots. So, off we go again. I guess these warmanistas, (or perhaps we should call them now, coldanistas ?), will have to come up with another b/s theory to help coax more dead research money out of us ? Just think, we were probably paying that wanker 100k plus a year to come up with that dribble ?

  101. David says:

    Hey Iain ?

    Cracked the ton again.
    Congrats

    😉

  102. David says:

    Shawn
    I forgot to comment about your ice age theory.
    Wasn’t the last ice age caused by an “impact event” ?
    If so, hardly something that can be defined, or attributed to AGW, or abuse of the planet’s resources ?

    No change in people’s attitudes or practices, will mean squat, if we get flattened by a bloody big rock hurtling towards the Earth ?

  103. Shawn Whelan says:

    Solar minimums only on average last about three years, until the new cycle kicks off again, as is the case now.

    Maybe, maybe not. The Sun has turned off before. The Maunder minimum went on for years with the low level of Sunspots. The activity did turn off. And the results were much more serious than a tiny bit of global warming. Millions starved. And the present condition of the Sun shows no emergence of a new cycle.

    “The Maunder Minimum is the name given to the period roughly from 1645 to 1715, when sunspots became exceedingly rare, as noted by solar observers of the time.”

    “During one 30-year period within the Maunder Minimum, astronomers observed only about 50 sunspots, as opposed to a more typical 40,000–50,000 spots in modern times.”

    “The Maunder Minimum coincided with the middle — and coldest part — of the Little Ice Age”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maunder_Minimum

    The recent Ice Ages(well recent in Geological time) have came in a regular pattern. This warm interglacial period we are in is the shorter period, the Ice over condition is the norm. The most predominant theory is that of the Milankovitch cycles causing this.

    The science is settled idea is ridiculous. They have not scratched the surface of understanding climate.

    Milankovitch cycles.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cycles

  104. Shawn Whelan says:

    For JM

    “Of concern for the western Arctic region for this summer, is the unusual amount of old ice described earlier in Franklin Strait and M’Clintock Channel. This will most certainly prevent the clearing of the Northwest Passage for a fourth consecutive year and affect transit through the Victoria Strait region during late August and early September period.”

    Click to access 20090603000000_ARCTIC001_0004399792.pdf

  105. Abu Chowdah says:

    I think it’s wonderful how love appears to have blossomed on this blog between PKD and the Phooll. And I’ve been able to play cupid merely by challenging their weak reasoning skills so that they could more easily identify a compatible mate.

    Natural selection in action but in this instance it’s a case of “survival of the weakest”.

  106. PKD says:

    Just ignore Abu Phil – the guy is a bit of an abusive troll I’m afraid…

    You must be desperate to team up with that foul mouthed PHOOL.

    Well, that was a general comment for anyone unlucky enough to receive Abu’s special brand of blog ‘love’…

  107. PKD says:

    …I’ve check those links Shawn – neither of them claim Hansen is a communist. An activist yes, a communist no.

    So perhaps you’re just incredibly mistaken???

  108. Shawn Whelan says:

    …I’ve check those links Shawn – neither of them claim Hansen is a communist. An activist yes, a communist no.

    So perhaps you’re just incredibly mistaken???

    Did you look at those weirdos Hansen is hanging out with?
    You think that is normal?

    Take the day and night and think it over.

  109. David says:

    Like anything in nature Shawn, the sunspot cycle is not static, or fixed. Mother Nature /Cosmology makes up her own mind, as to the timetable for things.

    I was waiting for someone to bring up the Maunder Minimum, and like AGW, there really are some “alarmists” out there. As this particular cycle bridge, was longer than normal, I have seen the argument rage between the camps, for a couple of years now.

    “Despite the ongoing controversy, for which there is decidedly no definitive answer as of the year 2000, there is no doubt the Maunder minimum years were a time of significant misery in Europe, with the long, harsh winters leading to shortened growing seasons, failed crops, and widespread famine. Whether, or to what degree, the Sun is responsible for this, is an important question for atmospheric scientists and astronomers to tackle over the next few decades.”
    http://science.jrank.org/pages/4184/Maunder-Minimum.html

    The above quote seems to portray the “lay of the land” in the science community. The last sentence is the most important. Alarmists always bring up the Maunder Minimum, to justify their theories, that the world is coming to an end. There is just no proof to back it up. Won’t find it either, cos it just doesn’t exist.

    Personally, I think it a hell of jump, to make that correlation. We have had solar peaks and troughs, every eleven years or so since, and nothing like mini ice ages have occurred. Australia has been in drought for the last ‘n’ years, and now, that drought looks to have been broken. That is climate in Australia, drought to flood, just the way it is. The last solar peak was 2002, and the the minimum last year, so we have gone from drought to flood all throughout the last cycle. I still can’t see the correlation between the two.

    “And the present condition of the Sun shows no emergence of a new cycle.”

    Hmm, hate to disappoint you Shawn, but the new cycle started some months ago, with a sighting of a sunspot that could not be attributed to the old cycle. So, it’s onward and upward. The new cycle has begun.

    “From Space Weather News for Jan. 4, 2008

    Solar physicists have been waiting for the appearance of a reversed-polarity sunspot to signal the start of the next solar cycle. The wait is over.

    A magnetically reversed, high-latitude sunspot emerged today. This marks the beginning of Solar Cycle 24 and the first step toward a new solar maximum. Intense solar activity won’t begin right away. Solar cycles usually take a few years to build from solar minimum (where we are now) to Solar Max (expected in 2011 or 2012). It’s a slow journey, but we’re on our way!

    Visit http://spaceweather.com for pictures of the new sunspot and updates.”
    http://www.scienceblog.com/cms/new-sunspot-cycle-begins-15154.html

    Well, that shoots down the no sunspot theorists ? Can’t argue with NOAA. They are the ones who own the solar observatory.

    There is simply no science out there, or theory that can be based in fact, or even close, that can convince me, (or anyone else for that matter that deals with this stuff on a daily basis), YET, that there is a correlation between sunspots, and planet’s weather patterns. Solar peaks only interfere with objects that are floating in our “unprotected planetary orbits”, such as satellites etc. Electromagnetic radiation kills satellites, and space shuttles etc, but as for weather nup sorry. The unfortunate thing, and I have mentioned this before, and is I think the main reason, why the weather correlation has come to fruition, is that sometimes, ionised clouds appear in the F layer, and even further above. These occur more often, in times of solar sunspot peaks, than troughs. This is where the confusion seems to stem, merely a clash of terms used.

    When there is a solar flare for example, the entire planet’s upper layers are bombarded by x-rays, and energised. If your theory is correct, then the entire planet would be affected, not just Eu. It is like when you throw a big rock into a mill pond, what happens ? Surface tension throws the shock of that event throughout the entire surface of the pond. Hence, you see a wave progress around that lake, to share that tension. Same with the ionosphere.

    I agree with you in, that, they haven’t even touched the surface, in trying to understand the science of it all yet. That is why all these cranks, get the audiences they do, and the dollars they do. Everyone is looking for answers. From someone that has studied this stuff for forty some years, (and even after all that time, I consider myself a beginner), I really don’t THINK, there is a correlation between the two. I think it is just happinstance, and in time, that will be proven out.

  110. David says:

    Bugger, in the moderation bin, forgot about the link thing Iain, sorry.

  111. David says:

    Just think, we were probably paying that wanker 100k plus a year to come up with that dribble ?”

    Forgot to comment on this. Hey, CSIRO, where can I get a job like this ? For 100k a year, sheez I’ll play ?

  112. Iain Hall says:

    fixed David 🙂

  113. David says:

    congrats again, on the 100+ !

  114. Abu Chowdah says:

    “Well, that was a general comment for anyone unlucky enough to receive Abu’s special brand of blog ‘love’…”

    My robust challenging of your faith-based views on climate change, as painful as they may seem, will only make you stronger, young man.

  115. Iain Hall says:

    Thanks for being part of it David 😀

  116. Shawn Whelan says:

    Sorry DD

    The new cycle has not started. The low Sunspotless cycle continues. It is not exactly top secret. Lowest levels of sunspots in over a hundred years.

    “New insight into the Sun’s mysterious quiet period
    Sonograms of the Sun explain mystery of the missing sunspots”

    June 17, 2009
    Scientists from the National Solar Observatory (NSO) in Tucson, Arizona, have discovered that a solar jet stream deep inside the Sun is migrating slower than usual through the star’s interior, giving rise to the current lack of sunspots and low solar activity. The group is presenting their findings this week at the meeting of the Solar Physics Division of the American Astronomical Society (AAS/SPD).

    The Sun normally undergoes an 11-year cycle of magnetic activity related to sunspots, solar flares, and the interplanetary storms called coronal mass ejections (CMEs). The current “solar minimum” quiet period has been unusually long and deep, confounding scientists who hope to understand the origins of space weather and the Sun’s magnetic field.
    Quote DD
    We have had solar peaks and troughs, every eleven years or so since, and nothing like mini ice ages have occurred.

    Do you think the Maunder Minimum may have been different because it went on for decades with no Sunspots?(what you previously said was impossible and the thinking of a wanker)

    Qoute DD
    When there is a solar flare for example, the entire planet’s upper layers are bombarded by x-rays

    Never heard anyting about X rays. Is that true?

    Many scientists think the solar flares affect the earths temperature. The common theory is that cosmic rays cause clouds to form.

    The Earth sure is cooling fast. And raining a lot.

    Just a coincidence?

    Quote DD
    Surface tension throws the shock of that event throughout the entire surface of the pond. Hence, you see a wave progress around that lake, to share that tension. Same with the ionosphere.

    Quit making jokes.
    You are a beginner. You haven’t been right about anything yet.

  117. David says:

    Where the hell do you come from suggesting that load of b/s Shawn ? What a load of crap ! You have read something into what Arizona said, and off you went. I am not denying that the new cycle is progressing a lot slower than has occurred in the past. No argument at all. BUT the fact remains, that the new cycle has begun. That has been PROVEN !!!

    Did you even read the links ? Apparently not. I don’t know who or where your information comes from, but mine has been sourced, and more importantly corroborated by other sources and observatories around the planet, by those organisations that are responsible for coming up with this stuff, and have been for years, so sorry, but your talking crap.

    “Quit making jokes”
    I don’t see the joke ? Maybe you should explain it to me ?

    The new sunspot cycle has started, and the way you can tell, that they are new sunspots that can’t be attributed to the old cycle, is that they are reversed in polarity. That shoots down your doomsday scenario, in one simple sentence.

    You obviously know nothing about the ionosphere, so stop trying to bullshit your way through the argument, with rhetoric. You don’t know what you are talking about.

  118. David says:

    “Many scientists think the solar flares affect the earths temperature. The common theory is that cosmic rays cause clouds to form.”

    Missed this bit.
    that was what I was saying, when there is confusion between weather and sunspots.

    The clouds they are talking about, are ionised clouds, up at least fifty miles and up to over 200 miles above the earth. These usually occur in times of Spring, and Summer, and are often called inversion layers. Nothing to do with weather. They usually occur, in times of sustained influence by large high pressure systems, again, the confusion between weather and sunspot activity. These ionised clouds are the result of weather patterns certainly, but do not occur on a regular basis, or have any affect on the weather at all.
    This is an entirely different subject to the one we are discussing and are sunspot independent. These clouds can occur at any time during the sunspot cycle, peak or minimum. That’s the floor in your argument.

  119. David says:

    By the way, I forgot to comment on this Shawn…

    “Like we are in an interglacial period and the glacial cold periods last much longer than the warm interglacier period.”

    If this were the case, how do you explain that both the northern and southern hemispheric summers respectively, were right up there as being the hottest, and most intense ever recorded ? Global cooling ?

    You have been sucked in to the argument that is purely rhetorical, and lacks any proof. Sensationalism again from you Shawn, nothing to back it up.

  120. Shawn Whelan says:

    Can you imagine there were enough people so easy to brainwash that they killed off their own livelihood.

    “Historic parallels in our time: the killing of cattle -vs- carbon
    20 06 2009
    From our perspective as a modern society, the actions of the Xhosa would seem foolhardy, even insane. First let me say, I’m not at all against alternate energy, or improved or even different technology. Heck, I drive an electric car myself and have done two solar power projects. But Waxman-Markey, if enacted, will be the equivalent of killing all our cattle at once. It took us over 100 years to get where we are now, we can’t expect change overnight, it must be gradual.

    If NASA’s James Hansen can be an advocate, then I may as well suggest that you send this story to your elected federal representatives and to your local letters to the editor, as is our right in the US Democracy constititional republic – Anthony”
    snip

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/06/20/historic-parallels-in-our-time-the-killing-of-of-cattle-vs-carbon/

  121. David says:

    So now you are switching the argument ? I thought you said it was the sunspot cycle (or lack of it), that showed we were headed for impending doom.
    Sure, cow farts are one of the biggest contributors to greenhouse gas, so we should go off, and kill all our cows ? Hmm, I think first before doing that, we should have a talk to countries like India and China, and getting them to introduce some emission controls for their new industrialised sectors.

    The article you linked does put forward one important, if extremely subtle point.

    People get carried away with arguments portrayed in any debate. Passion can sway opinion certainly.

    The research is out there, has been for years, but due to the economic consequences of what needs to be done, the “fix” is not being done. We need to shift from an industrialised economy to a more agrarian economy, or at least industries are are sustainable without shoving thousands of tonnes of crap into our atmosphere. Until that happens the future is looking incredibly bleak.

  122. Shawn Whelan says:

    They still have not determined the official end of Cycle 23 and the start of Cycle 24.

    ‘This activity came late enough in the month of May, to keep the monthly number for May below the value of 14 months ago of 3.2 which it is replacing in the 13 month running mean. That means the solar cycle minimum can’t be earlier than November 2008, making it at least a 12.5 year long cycle 23.

    The value needs to fall below 3.4 in June to move the minimum to December. That is still possible if the sunspot group continues to decay as most have done as they crossed the disk in recent months. If it stays below that value, we will likely see the solar minimum in December, 2008 as 14 months before that the sun was very quiet with just a sunspot number of 0.5. If not, the minimum will be November. It is my guess that November will win the prize.

    We added 22 more sunspotless days to the total for this cycle transition which as of June 1 had now reached an amazing 614 days. We are likely to add additional days and add 2009 to 2007 and 2008 as recent years in the top ten since 1900. Only the early 1900s had a similar 3 year stretch of high sunspot days (1911, 1912, and 1913).

    It also marks the longest cycle in 150 years, tying the one that peaked in 1848. You have to go back to the Dalton minimum in 1816 to find a longer cycle 12.7 years.).

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/06/03/sunspot-minimum-may-be-at-hand/

  123. Shawn Whelan says:

    Over the past month the Sun’s visible surface has been almost blank, just one or two sunspot groups the entire time (May 10 – June 10, 2009).

    http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/pickoftheweek/

  124. Shawn Whelan says:

    So now you are switching the argument ? I thought you said it was the sunspot cycle (or lack of it), that showed we were headed for impending doom.
    You should read before you yack.

    The story is about how easy it was to brainwash a population into destroying their way of life and themselves. Just like Algore and Hansen did to the AGW believers.

  125. Shawn Whelan says:

    If this were the case, how do you explain that both the northern and southern hemispheric summers respectively, were right up there as being the hottest, and most intense ever recorded ? Global cooling ?

    For one the nutter Hansen fudges the data and for two the date is incomplete and for three NASA weather stations are a joke. Like something a little kid would put together. The satellite data all shows cooling.

    Of course it is a fact that the glaciated periods wer elonger than the interglacial periods. Where do you dream this stuff up? I already provided you the links.

    Look at the glacial time on here.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_glaciation

    This is what your an expert on?
    You don’t seem to know anything about the subject.

  126. David says:

    I don’t know where you got your link from, and will not even bother to read it Shawn, cos it’s bullshit. I am not going to bother with some comment page. I go to NASA and NOAA, the ones in charge of the actual observations. They say the new sunspots are appearing, and are showing the pictures.

    The way to tell that new sunspots are being viewed, is that they have reversed polarity to those in cycle 23. That has been ascertained. Admittedly, they are small, and not constant, but they are there.

    Sorry mate.

  127. David says:

    Just to add insult to injury,

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30643958/

    is a picture taken of the first new sunspot taken last September.

    Poof !!!! Well, there goes that argument down the drain, unless you reckon NASA’s photo is a fake ?

  128. Phill says:

    Sabu give me a break! Weak reasoning skills.

    What ever comments I make on this here blog, are straight off the cuff dip stick.Unlike you and others, who just transfer the thoughts of other people’s work, straight off the net.

    If the points made about G.W. apart from generalisations had any credibility or merit they would not appear on Iain Hall’s blog, of that there is no doubt.You would be possibly commenting on some scientific forum, with peer review.

    Yea right!

    You and Shawn Whelan know about as much about G.W. as I do physics, and quantum theory.

    I have already admitted I know five fifths of fanny adams about G.W. that is about 100% more than you do.

    You and Whelan are that far up your own arses in this debate, you really are oblivious to the fact how stupid you come across, by professing to be experts.

    Now if you want to say your expert has a superior grasp of the subject than mine, that’s fine I can deal with that. But spare me your I am a superior intellect than you, and I know better routine. Because you have read some other persons opinion on the subject, and it fits in with your ideology, your opinion is worth the same as mine,F.A.

  129. David says:

    Ok, for shits and giggles, I checked out your link

    They are talking about events that occurred over thousands, if not millions of years. Even the article doesn’t suggest a cause. Ice core studies have been deemed unreliable for decades, as the science is not yet available for a definitive chronological fix, but for purposes of this argument, let’s just say that rough enough is good enough and say the core sample conclusions were accurate ?

    The only theory they have come up with, as to the cause of the last major ice age, is the impact event theory. Hmm. Doesn’t really help us here does it ?

    I don’t know who this Hanson is, not interested. I only go by numbers. Empirical, indisputable numbers.

    Over the last three hundred or so years, sunspot cycles have been observed, tabulated, and correlated to everything but acne. They come and they go. Varying in intensity, and now in the sixty odd years, (the technology age), we have witnessed varying amounts of damage trails to prove they are there. Over that period of time, there has also been serious study in the Earth’s weather. Nowhere in that history, has there been any sort of link, between the SSC and weather. We have had hot summers and cold winters, in both hemispheres in that time, and then returned to somewhat of a normal climate. I am not saying that GW (or even perhaps GC), is not occurring but your cause cannot be proven, shit, can’t even prove a slight correlation. You are trying to compare thousands if not millions of years on a pretty graph, to the present last 100 years or so. A proven pattern cannot be ascertained in such a short period of time. If you tried, you would be dismissed as a looney. There are arguments on both sides that suggest the earth is warming, and cooling. Both sides have merit, but NEITHER have the slightest proof to back up their arguments, that is why the argument continues to rage out there.

    The last solar peak was about 2000, and the one before that around 1988, the one before that about 1976. All three I observed, and from memory during those cycles, weather was not affected. Pollution controls were no where near as strict as they are now, so where’s your argument again ? The planet’s average temperature has dropped 0.6 of a degree over x years ? Seriously, whoopy do ?

    I would attribute that to pollution rather than the SSC.

  130. Abu Chowdah says:

    Phooll, tell us another one of your scatological porn tales. They add to your credibility.

  131. David says:

    By the way, the latest from NASA regarding your :

    “June 17, 2009
    Scientists from the National Solar Observatory (NSO) in Tucson, Arizona, have discovered that a solar jet stream deep inside the Sun is migrating slower than usual through the star’s interior, giving rise to the current lack of sunspots and low solar activity. The group is presenting their findings this week at the meeting of the Solar Physics Division of the American Astronomical Society (AAS/SPD).”

    You only included half of the quote. They further went on to say, that now, as of 20/6, that jet stream has now finally, increased in speed, and new spots are now even more visible, and will increase over the next period of time, bringing with it, a higher frequency of new sunspots.

    Another Shawn theory shot down in flames. Next time, perhaps it would be better to produce evidence of your argument, that is not so easy to cross check ?
    .

  132. Ray Dixon says:

    Check the other thread boys, there’s a big debate going on over Mrs Yolanovic’s undies. That’s one you might be able to solve.

  133. PKD says:

    Did you look at those weirdos Hansen is hanging out with? You think that is normal?

    Aah, I see the logic of Shawn now…

    1) Wierd activists MUST be communists.
    2) Hansen is hanging around wierd activists.
    3) Therefore Hansen MUST be a communist!

    I guess this is the 1st graders thinking that also made you claim that AGW needed to be monotonic Shawn? Yes, I see the pattern emerging now…and the qualification standards for Canadain geologists must be likewise dire.

    For one the nutter Hansen fudges the data and for two the date is incomplete and for three NASA weather stations are a joke. Like something a little kid would put together. The satellite data all shows cooling.

    And you want us to take you seriously when you claim Hansen fudged the data?

    Sure, just like you’ve fudged the claim that Hansen is a Communist!

  134. Phill says:

    Sabu I don’t do porn. But if you tell me where you live I’ll come around and take a leak on you to first make you smell like a man.Then I’ll go about showing you what your parents should have.Only until you love me of course like your parents.. And that won’t take long Sabu.

  135. Abu Chowdah says:

    You are only degrading yourself, Fool, while you keep me amused. Dance, my little puppet, dance!

    BTW: Write for Grods in your spare time?

  136. David says:

    You’re a shit stirrer Abu.
    Always the first sign of someone that can’t carry an argument legitimately. Phil do you yourself a favour and ignore him. The argument has been won.

  137. Shawn Whelan says:

    Every prediction NASA has made has been wrong. There is still no official declaration of cycle 24 beginning. The Maunder minimum and the coldest weather in recent earth history correspond perfectly. There is no such evidence with CO2 levels. CO2 levels are rising and the Earth is cooling.

    That is the science.

    And Hansen is a nutter. That is a fact. Only a fellow nutter wouldn’t be able to see that.

    And here is what the geniuses at NASA predicted for Cycle 24. (NASA has become a joke)

    Predicting Cycles 24 and 25

    The Predictive Flux-transport Dynamo Model is enabling NCAR scientists to predict that the next solar cycle, known as Cycle 24, will produce sunspots across an area slightly larger than 2.5% of the visible surface of the Sun. The scientists expect the cycle to begin in late 2007 or early 2008, which is about 6 to 12 months later than a cycle would normally start. Cycle 24 is likely to reach its peak about 2012.

    By analyzing recent solar cycles, the scientists also hope to forecast sunspot activity two solar cycles, or 22 years, into the future. The NCAR team is planning in the next year to issue a forecast of Cycle 25, which will peak in the early 2020s.

    “This is a significant breakthrough with important applications, especially for satellite-dependent sectors of society,” explains NCAR scientist Peter Gilman.

    Totally wrong predicting Solar Cycle 24.
    NASA is going to predict the solar cycles 22 years into the future and the climate for the next hundred years. LOL

  138. Shawn Whelan says:

    “Many scientists think the solar flares affect the earths temperature. The common theory is that cosmic rays cause clouds to form.”

    Missed this bit.
    that was what I was saying, when there is confusion between weather and sunspots.

    The clouds they are talking about, are ionised clouds, up at least fifty miles and up to over 200 miles above the earth. These usually occur in times of Spring, and Summer, and are often called inversion layers. Nothing to do with weather. They usually occur, in times of sustained influence by large high pressure systems, again, the confusion between weather and sunspot activity. These ionised clouds are the result of weather patterns certainly, but do not occur on a regular basis, or have any affect on the weather at all.

    This is total crap. No basis in science.

    Shawn
    I forgot to comment about your ice age theory.
    Wasn’t the last ice age caused by an “impact event” ?
    If so, hardly something that can be defined, or attributed to AGW, or abuse of the planet’s resources ?

    More of the same. No basis in science.

  139. Shawn Whelan says:

    And here is the NASA prediction.

    Who wants to bet they are wrong?

    http://www.solarcycle24.com/

  140. Shawn Whelan says:

    Sunspots recently are behaving like a Cheshire Cat: the smile is there (magnetic fields) but the body is missing (no dark markings). We are unsure about past cycles but at present sunspots, with their usual umbrae and penumbrae, are failing to materialize. For hundreds of years the Sun has shown an approximately periodic 11-year alteration in its activity where the number of sunspots increases and then decreases. Sunspots are dark regions on the solar disk with magnetic field strengths greater than 1500-1800 Gauss. The last sunspot maximum occurred in 2001. Magnetically active sunspots at that time (Figure 1A) produced powerful flares, caused large geomagnetic disturbances, and disrupted some space-based technology.

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/06/13/sunspots-today-a-cheshire-cat-new-essay-from-livingston-and-penn/#more-8478

  141. Ray Dixon says:

    Write for Grods in your spare time?

    They don’t pay enough. Try Crikey.

  142. Shawn Whelan says:

    Sabu I don’t do porn. But if you tell me where you live I’ll come around and take a leak on you to first make you smell like a man.

    Don’t start that again Phill.
    Last time you did that Ray called you out and you ended up grovelling disgustingly.

  143. Shawn Whelan says:

    Aah, I see the logic of Shawn now…

    1) Wierd activists MUST be communists.
    2) Hansen is hanging around wierd activists.
    3) Therefore Hansen MUST be a communist!

    No you get it!

    A short comedy break.
    He’s Barack Obama

  144. David says:

    Impact event, no basis in science huh Shawn ?

    What caused the ice age then ? No sunspots ?

    Perhaps cavemen were designing and building little co2 generators in a cave somewhere ?

    The new sunspot cycle has begun, and another confirming report came out on the weekend, which refutes your spiel of doomsday crap. The eddy has begun to increase in speed, and with it, new sunspot cycles are forming. That report is an audio report from the American Radio Relay League, a not for profit organisation representing ham radio ops. Suppose you think they are crackpots as well ? As it is a particularly long bridge, new sunspots will also take a while to appear, then disappear, that is nature.

    Take a deep breath Shawn. Your wrong this time, but never mind, next time you may be right for a change.

  145. David says:

    sorry, that should read new sunspots are forming. Would put the audio report up for you to listen to, but don’t know how to do it ?
    🙄

  146. Shawn Whelan says:

    Impact event, no basis in science huh Shawn ?

    What caused the ice age then ? No sunspots ?

    Perhaps cavemen were designing and building little co2 generators in a cave somewhere ?
    There have been many Ice Ages. If cavemen were building little CO2 generators wouldn’t that have stopped the Ice Age according to your AGW beliefs?

    They do not know for sure what caused the last Ice Age but I have never heard of it being caused by impact.

    Like I said before they actually know very little about climate and are learning. The Algore BS that the science is settled is BS.

    Technically we are in Cycle 24. But it has not really started. It is still at a weird minimum with tiny little sunspots that only last a few days. When they say the cycle started they mean it fired up, and it hasn’t.

    That NASA report will likely turn out to be bunk. Every single thing NASA has predicted about this sunspot cycle 24 they have been wrong on. I will be really surprised if this is correct.

    Today there is one tiny Sunspot that formed. that is it on the whole Sun. Hardely a booming breakout.

    If this works you can see the Sunspot cycle. It is still really at a minimum and is going to be very interesting if it actually does breakout. Now they are calling Nov or Dec the minimum and the start of the new cycle. If the Sun goes dead they may need to change that. and there is very little activity in the Sun.

    I don’t know if this will work.
    It is the chart withm the NASA predictiojn.

  147. Shawn Whelan says:

    This is where the real eggheads discuss sunspots. They say NASA or whoever is doing the counting is cheating.

    http://solarcycle24com.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=recent

    Iain sent me that Radio spot.

    It is referring to this NASA prediction.
    They are just guessing. NASA has been wrong on every single prediction so far and I think they are grasping at straws.

    http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2009/17jun_jetstream.htm?list173737

  148. David says:

    1. The information is coming from the solar observatory.
    2. Most scientific sources now maintain, that the last major ice age on this planet was caused by an impact event.

    “Technically we are in Cycle 24. But it has not really started”

    Hmm, I guess this is what is meant, as having a “bob each way” ?
    Make up your mind. You have been stating, (vehemently I might add), that we had no new sunspot cycle, and looked like another long minimum as suggested to be analogous to the Maunder Minimum ?

    Again, I repeat that, fact, the first sunspot appeared last December. Hang on, you said that there were no sunspots, and that we were still in the lull, at the end of the old cycle ? Make up your mind Shawn !

    Admittedly, it was only a small one, and didn’t show it’s face for long, but it was from the new cycle. That was December last year. The way they could tell, was it was reverse in polarity from the old cycle, and any existing spots. Again, a new series of sunspots have appeared on the sun’s surface. The eddy currents you were talking about, have picked up speed,and that is in the report that I have uploaded to Iain, as an mp3. That is straight from the observatories mouth, refuting your latest re this subject. Admittedly, the report is only days old, but Iain has it if you want it. It has also been broadcast on This Week in Amateur Radio, a ham news program, that goes out to over 200 countries, and been around for 16 years, so for reporting the news regarding this stuff, it is pretty highly regarded. ( http://www.twiar.org )

    Unfortunately, where you are being led astray, is by old data. The chart you are pointing to, is one I have also seen, but that takes into account the past, and not the present. Also, it’s scale is way too abbreviated for it to be of any use to use in this argument.

    The link above that I had, actually shows a picture of the December sunspot, from the camera on the actual telescope Shawn. Even you couldn’t argue with that, and before you say it, it had a reversed polarity to the previous spots seen as part of the previous cycle.

    Sorry mate, the new cycle has begun. Did so last December. Now with the pick up in speed of the eddy current you were on about, scientists are predicting a systematic uptake of new sunspots to appear over the coming months. As to the timing, scientists don’t know. Could be a long uptake or a quick one. Normally, the sunspot cycle picks up quick, to an early peak, and the downward trend is a lot slower. Time will tell.

    Rest assured, ALL evidence out there tells us that the cycle has begun. Perhaps not with a bang as we had hoped, more like a wimper, but it is a start.

  149. David says:

    Whoa,

    Congrats Iain,

    150 !!!!!

    woohoo

    🙄

  150. David says:

    Here is the link, for the text version of the mp3 I sent you Iain. Pretty diffinitive, especially

    http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2009/17jun_jetstream.htm?list45339

    “The jet stream is now, finally, reaching the critical latitude, heralding a return of solar activity in the months and years ahead.”

  151. Shawn Whelan says:

    2. Most scientific sources now maintain, that the last major ice age on this planet was caused by an impact event.

    Take care of this foolishness first.
    Find me some proof on that I have never heard anyone mention an impact event caused the Ice Age. Just the last one or all of the ice ages?
    You can’t just make stuff up because it sounds good.

    http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_caused_the_Ice_Age

    There are still very, very few sunspots and you can argue the semantics all day long but if the Sun doesn’t soon come up with some real and large cycle 24 sunspots something is really amiss.
    The cycle is not kicking off even if the NASA boys start counting phoney Sunspots. It looks Maunder Minimum like. At this point the guy you call the Wanker is looking pretty good.

    Doesn’t it ever make you wonder what is going on when NASA is so corrupt?

    Again, I repeat that, fact, the first sunspot appeared last December
    You never said that.(and it is incorrect) Make up your mind.

    This is the longest Solar Cycle since the early 1800’s. Doesn’t that strike you as unusual?

    ‘This Week in Amateur Radio’ just rehashed the same NASA report that we have already been discussed a couple times. I could have gone on the radio and read the NASA report. Of course the NASA report if it follows the pattern of NASA predictions on solar Cycle 24, will be wrong.

  152. David says:

    Oh poor old Shawn. You talk with forked tongue.
    This report is two days old Shawn, and quoted from below :

    http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2009/17jun_jetstream.htm?list45339

    Blows away all your pretty little graphs and charts. This report is just new, and only been put up.

    Be a game man to call all those guys cranks.

  153. David says:

    From your own link Shawn ?

    “the impact of relatively large meteorites, and eruptions of supervolcanoes.”

    Hmm, do you actually read this stuff, or do you ignore the important bits ?

  154. David says:

    “but if the Sun doesn’t soon come up with some real and large cycle 24 sunspots something is really amiss.”

    Wait a minute, you said that there weren’t ANY sunspots, and that the new cycle hadn’t begun yet.

    Make up your mind, which is it ?
    Your credibility is down around your ankles Sir.

  155. Shawn Whelan says:

    Oh poor old Shawn. You talk with forked tongue.
    This report is two days old Shawn, and quoted from below :
    http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2009/17jun_jetstream.htm?list45339

    I am starting to think you are a little thick.

    Checkout your own comment at June 21@ 3:28.

    You already yourself commented on that article.
    and it was commented on before that.

  156. Shawn Whelan says:

    From your own link Shawn ?

    “the impact of relatively large meteorites, and eruptions of supervolcanoes.”

    Hmm, do you actually read this stuff, or do you ignore the important bits ?

    That settles it you are thick.

    It says that is a possible cause. Something that may have caused it. they don’t say an impact was the cause. There is a big difference unless your thick. They don’t know for sure what caused the Ice Ages, and do you yet understand there was more than one Ice Age?

  157. David says:

    And yet you continue to bring up the fact that none of this is even happening at all ?

  158. David says:

    Again you are changing the goal posts to support a weak argument. It was your reference I was citing. It doesn’t even enforce your own argument Shawn. Geez !

    So, after all this, what is your argument now ?
    Ok, no sunspots, scratch that, small sunspots, scratch that, only seen for a short period of time, no scratch that, no eddy currents, so eddy currents just picked up can’t be that,,,,,,,,shit, what’s next ?
    🙄

  159. Shawn Whelan says:

    Wait a minute, you said that there weren’t ANY sunspots, and that the new cycle hadn’t begun yet.

    Make up your mind, which is it ?
    Your credibility is down around your ankles Sir.

    Go to this forum and see what the real eggheads are saying about the Sunspots being faked. Then give them some of your homespun solar theories. Eggheads always enjoy a good laugh.

    http://solarcycle24com.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=recent

    It is up to you. Do you want to go read what the experts are saying or do you want to continue on with you homespun hillbilly solar science?

  160. Shawn Whelan says:

    So, after all this, what is your argument now ?
    Ok, no sunspots, scratch that, small sunspots, scratch that, only seen for a short period of time, no scratch that, no eddy currents, so eddy currents just picked up can’t be that,,,,,,,,shit, what’s next ?

    Quit babbling and go here and read.
    http://solarcycle24com.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=recent

  161. David says:

    :rofl:

    Faked ! The guy’s image was faked, the picture is real, from the solar observatory. Again you read something into nothing, trying to reinforce a failed argument.

    Well folks, there it is !!

    Who says the Roswell theory is defunct.

  162. David says:

    BTW,
    I get information from the source, not some backyard know it all Shawn. They want to manipulate the original photo for a bit of photoshop fun, fine, good on them .The photos from NASA are sold around the world, and as such, have a legal warranty behind them, as being legitimate. Academia pours over them, with magnifying glasses, so again, what would be the point ?

    There are too many part timers out there, that could prove the image as false, (if it were so), five minutes after it was published.

    You’ll have to come up with something better than that.

  163. David says:

    Again, I ask you to read your own link.

    Not once, in your link, does anyone say that the photo was faked, or manipulated. What they are talking about, using photoshop or similar, is to enhance the detail regarding the new sunspots. i.e. a close up, or magnification in other words.

    Again, you are talking from rear end Shawn. Come up with something better than that. READ YOUR OWN (SUPPOSED) FACTS.

  164. Abu Chowdah says:

    “You’re a shit stirrer Abu.
    Always the first sign of someone that can’t carry an argument legitimately. Phil do you yourself a favour and ignore him. The argument has been won.”

    I may be a shit stirrer but at least I’m not a bullshit peddler.

  165. David says:

    “I may be a shit stirrer but at least I’m not a bullshit peddler.”
    could of fooled me.

  166. Phill says:

    “I may be a shit stirrer but at least I’m not a bullshit peddler.”

    My God! Sabu, you make bullshit a science.

    Now if your a good boy I will come around an remove the trainer wheels on your bicycle.

  167. David says:

    Maybe a surgeon to remove that ten pounds of ugly fat growing between his shoulder blades

  168. David says:

    Give it a miss Phill, sooner continue with the debate.
    That’s where the fun is

  169. JM says:

    Shawn

    Let me qive you a tip. Do not, repeat do not, get into an argument with a ham radio buff about the ionosphere and sunspots.

    Just don’t do it.

    They are the go-to guys for real world empirical knowledge on the subject – and one of the few examples (amateur astronomers and botanists would be the others) where the professionals rely on the amateurs for real world observation (that’s ’empirical’ data to you).

    Now I have had my disagreements with DD but I am absolutely in full agreement with him when he says the sunspot cycle has nothing to do with weather, long term warming/cooling cycles or anything else much. I say that because I’ve read peer reviewed studies that say there is no correlation at all, nothing, zip, nada.

    But DD has a few decades of personal experience under his belt to confirm it.

    Give it a miss, you are just so totally wrong on this aspect of GW that it beggars belief.

  170. Ray Dixon says:

    could of fooled me.

    I hate to be a grammar nazi, David, but “could of” ???

  171. David says:

    could’ve ?
    🙂

  172. David says:

    as my old man used to say

    wooda shooda cooda ?

  173. Ray Dixon says:

    I think yous could of got them thinks write if yous had dun bogan skuul like I dun.

  174. David says:

    booboom

  175. David says:

    BTW what’s wrong with “could of” anyway ?

  176. David says:

    wait a minute, light in the fridge upstairs just went on.
    Could have ?

  177. Shawn Whelan says:

    DD
    I don’t have time right now but here is a reading assignment to understand the Sunspots that are being produced.

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/06/13/sunspots-today-a-cheshire-cat-new-essay-from-livingston-and-penn/

  178. Shawn Whelan says:

    To learn about Cycle 24 go here and read what the Sunspot eggheads think.

    (new link)
    http://solarcycle24com.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general

  179. Shawn Whelan says:

    Now I have had my disagreements with DD but I am absolutely in full agreement with him when he says the sunspot cycle has nothing to do with weather, long term warming/cooling cycles or anything else much. I say that because I’ve read peer reviewed studies that say there is no correlation at all, nothing, zip, nada.

    Well what better proof is there than that. JM has yet to beat the broken clock. At this point in science nobody knows for sure if the Sun is related to the Earth’s temperature. When you look at the Maunder Minimumum it is certainly a better correlation than anything in the CO2 chain.

    The science isn’t yet known although if this minimum extends they will learn much more. (if they don’t all freeze to death)

  180. Shawn Whelan says:

    wait a minute, light in the fridge upstairs just went on.
    Could have ?

    It’s a dim bulb.

  181. David says:

    Speaking of dim bulbs

    “At this point in science nobody knows for sure if the Sun is related to the Earth’s temperature. ”

    Well, guru, what is that white ball in the sky, that makes the grass grow in the yard every day, and gives us a tan, and shit, warms us when we are cold.

    Man, that just proved beyond doubt that you are a fool.

  182. David says:

    You are EXACTLY the reason as to why, no SERIOUS research is being done into GW/GC Shawn, and why no one believes the cranks out there. It’s a shame too, as one day soon, the correct causal relationship will be ascertained, and you know what will happen ? No one will believe it.

    You are an alarmist, and an unbelievably unqualified one at that. You and clam chowda make a fine pair.

    You are the type of person that attempt to fires up the population in to a frenzy, without learning anything about the science behind it, purely to get some recognition.

    Well, you have the reputation now, you are an absolute nutter, and I don’t particularly care what you call me. I have been studying this shit, (admittedly as a layman), ever since I turned on my first CB radio in 1966, and heard american voices coming through from Guam. I was, and have been hooked on this shit ever since. I have bounced signals off the moon, talked through satellites, talked to crew on the ISS, as well as many other people using ISS as a repeater, spoken to over 320 countries using my own antennas, so as such, I feel qualified enough to say, that when it comes to the Sunspot Cycle, you know SFA. So go away, like I did, study the thing for over 40 years, instead of trying to “Google” your way out of an unwinnable position, then come back to peddle your wares.

  183. David says:

    Hey Ray,
    sorry, it’s late ?

    😉

  184. Shawn Whelan says:

    you would think if you started studying this in ’66 you would have learned something by now.

    i remember when I was a young guy in the auto business, all the incompetent older feloows would always start up with, “i have been doing this for 30 years”. And they had managed to learn nothing.

    If you wanted to learn you would be better off reading in here than just babbling.

    Nobody, no scientist in this world fully understands the interactions between the Sun and the Earth or climate in general. It is you that claim you have one hundred percent knowledge that the Maunder Minimum did not cool the Earth. (after you claimed an event like the Maunder Minimum was impossible and was the idea of a Wanker) And it is you that claim with 100% confidence that we will not enter a minimum period of sunspots.

    http://solarcycle24com.proboards.com/index.cgi#general

  185. Shawn Whelan says:

    Well, guru, what is that white ball in the sky, that makes the grass grow in the yard every day, and gives us a tan, and shit, warms us when we are cold.

    Man, that just proved beyond doubt that you are a fool.

    So now you’re 100% sure that the Sun controls the Earths temperature?

    When it is cold and you turn on your furnace does the furnace control the temperature?

    Do you think maybe the thermostat controls the temperature? And other factors like the outside temperature affect it? Think it over.

    Maybe JM and PKD can help you out with that one.

    If you refuse to read the links you will never understand. Like PKD and JM. And I know you don’t want that.

  186. Abu Chowdah says:

    Wait, Shawn, are you saying that massive ball of nuclear energy has no effect on the earth’s temperature, or that it’s not the only factor? If the latter then I agree. If the former then WTF?

  187. David says:

    You still haven’t explained this little pearl of wisdom yet ?

    “At this point in science nobody knows for sure if the Sun is related to the Earth’s temperature. ”

    Well, guru, what is that white ball in the sky, that makes the grass grow in the yard every day, and gives us a tan, and shit, warms us when we are cold.

    Man, that just proved beyond doubt that you are a fool.

  188. David says:

    Ever heard of photosynthesis d/head ?

  189. David says:

    “Nobody, no scientist in this world fully understands the interactions between the Sun and the Earth or climate in general. It is you that claim you have one hundred percent knowledge that the Maunder Minimum did not cool the Earth. (after you claimed an event like the Maunder Minimum was impossible and was the idea of a Wanker) And it is you that claim with 100% confidence that we will not enter a minimum period of sunspots.”

    That’s not what I said at all. Again, you are just making this up as you go along. You stated that we were in for another term of no or little sunspot activity, and you were the one who brought up the Maunder minimum. So now you are saying that it was the Maunder that caused a mini ice age at the time. One word for you, bollocks. There is still no proven or even suspected, relationship between sunspots and weather, none. You are trying to compare atmospheric phenomina, to electromagnetic. It’s all mute anyway, as the new SSC has begun.

    “Do you think maybe the thermostat controls the temperature? And other factors like the outside temperature affect it? Think it over.”

    Don’t need to think it over. I have just woken up from a nap, waiting for the kettle to boil, so no caffeine to clear the head, and I can blow that heap of dribble out of the water in one sentence or maybe two for you.

    Ever heard about the Earth’s orbit around the sun ?
    Ever wondered as to why the Earth rotates on it’s own axis every 24 hours or so ?
    Ever wondered as to what causes seasons ?

    Gee, might be, that the Earth travels slightly eliptically around the sun, and takes a year to do it ? Closer to the sun, funny, we get warmer temps and we call it Summer, further away, we get Winter. Funny about that isn’t it ?

    “Maybe JM and PKD can help you out with that one.”
    Trust me when I say, as soon as they pull themselves off the floor from laughing, they will shoot your shit down just as quick as I have.

    Google that.

  190. David says:

    solarcycle24 is a discussion board, not even a blog.
    Even I won’t discuss the validity of theories placed there.
    FACTS, just the FACTS
    Been pretty tough trying to find any to support your wacky theories tho hasn’t it Shawn. Quite simply, you won’t find any.

  191. David says:

    “i remember when I was a young guy in the auto business, all the incompetent older fellows would always start up with, “i have been doing this for 30 years”. And they had managed to learn nothing.”

    Learn nothing from the oldies huh ?
    Ever heard of the concept of the Apprentice/Apprenticeship ?

    The man with the funny little hat once said :
    “The very young do not often do as they are told”
    Sort of explains why the planet is fcked (sorry Iain)

  192. Iain Hall says:

    Having got this far guys lets do it!
    Ray
    you are being a spoilsport by not posting your complaint here BTW

  193. David says:

    I agree Iain.
    0400 on the east coast of Canada,
    2230 on the west coast of Canada,

    Play time ?

  194. David says:

    The funny thing about the whole 200 odd posts, Iain, was that one person was trying to refute five hundred years of carefully recorded and tabulated observations, with a theory, and I am still not exactly certain of what that theory is ?

    The new sunspot cycle has started, and to call the NASA observations fake, is beyond me. We are not dealing with the moon landing, dealt with in the movie Capricorn 13. There aren’t any awards wagered on it, nor international glory for that matter. In the grand scheme of things, the peak of the sunspot cycle kills a few satellites, but little else. It pays merry havoc with the earth’s communications systems, but we are in the lull of the said cycle, not the peak. That won’t be for another 4 to 6 odd years. So I don’t get it.

    Are these people so hell bent on slamming their b/s global warming/cooling theories down our throat that they come up with these wild conclusions ? I have asked Shawn, and ever Abu Graid to explain it to me, but still waiting.

    Unfair questions ? I don’t think so.
    🙄

  195. David says:

    Sorry, forgot, they also haven’t explained how an electromagnetic ionosphere, affected by sunspots, or lack of them, up some 200 miles from the surface of the earth, affects weather systems located at the surface of the earth.

    Also,
    The sunspot cycle, only affects electromagnetic forces on the planets surface, and thus, is transparent. It is not a cloud of smoke, enveloping the planet, keeping warmth in, or allowing the earth to cool. It, certainly, protects the planet from being bombarded by ultra-violet rays, cosmic rays, xrays, gamma rays, yada yada, but little else. There is just no causal relationship, that has been proven, to relate the ssc to earths’ weather. NONE.

  196. David says:

    PPS
    I don’t know what your record is Iain, but I also think Ray, but not putting his comment here, was a bit mean.

    As said, don’t know what your record is, but it has been a terrific discussion, at least to us egg heads that live and breathe this stuff.

    To cap it off son, I would like you to have the privilege of knocking it off ?

    🙂

  197. Iain Hall says:

    Well thanks very much gentlemen!
    I have enjoyed watching the discussion and a commenting record being set!

  198. David says:

    Is that the highest you have had ?
    If so congrats.

  199. Iain Hall says:

    Well it is for this week 🙂
    I would have to check nearly 1800 posts as Word Press don’t allow you to search your blog for the post with the most comments, or I haven’t worked out how to do it.
    🙂

  200. Ray Dixon says:

    Word Press don’t allow you to search your blog for the post with the most comments

    Iain, it’s easy. In your dashboard, click on “posts” in the LH sidebar. It gives you a list of all your posts. 2nd column from right tells you how many comments.

    Btw, it ALSO set a record for most repitition!

  201. David says:

    Boy that was pretty ‘catty’ Ray ?
    🙄

  202. PKD says:

    “Maybe JM and PKD can help you out with that one.”

    Trust me when I say, as soon as they pull themselves off the floor from laughing, they will shoot your shit down just as quick as I have.

    Sorry David – i was far oo busy dragging myself off the floor from laughing to do the rest of that! Looks like you guys have done a fine job of shooting Shawns shit donw anyway!!!

    And congrats on the 200 posts Iain!

  203. PKD says:

    down I meant – dowwwwwwn!

    Oh well : 206 comments I guess!

  204. Ray Dixon says:

    It wasn’t meant to be “catty”, David. It’s just that this topic has been done to death many times over in many different posts. You’d have to agree. Phill agrees.

  205. David says:

    In that regard, I entirely agree with you Ray.
    But it just goes to show how emotional these blog topics can get doesn’t it ? It was good fun though, and from a seemingly discussed-to-death topic, can come such a good foray.

    PKD
    Bet your kicking yourself you missed the fun ?

  206. PKD says:

    Yeah, and I thought I was time poor on the Net before Sims 3 came out – now I can’t get anywhere near the damn computer!!!

  207. Shawn Whelan says:

    “Gee, might be, that the Earth travels slightly eliptically around the sun, and takes a year to do it ? Closer to the sun, funny, we get warmer temps and we call it Summer, further away, we get Winter. Funny about that isn’t it ?’

    So closer to the sun is Summer and farther from the Sun is Winter? When I was in school that was about grade 4 science.

    You are kinda comical DD, but your knowledge is abysmal.

    So tell if what you wrote is true ,why is it now Summer in Canada and Winter in Australia?

    Dr. Jack Eddy
    “Were God to give us, at last, the cable, or patch-cord that links the Sun to the Climate System it would have on the solar end a banana plug, and on the other, where it hooks into the Earth—in ways we don’t yet know—a Hydra-like tangle of multiple 24-pin parallel computer connectors. It is surely at this end of the problem where the greatest challenges lie.”

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/06/21/quote-of-the-week-11/#more-8759

  208. Shawn Whelan says:

    You still haven’t explained this little pearl of wisdom yet ?

    “At this point in science nobody knows for sure if the Sun is related to the Earth’s temperature. ”

    Well, guru, what is that white ball in the sky, that makes the grass grow in the yard every day, and gives us a tan, and shit, warms us when we are cold.

    Man, that just proved beyond doubt that you are a fool.

    I meant ‘how’ the Sun affects the earths temperature.
    Do you think the atmosphere and it’s millions of variations does not affect the Earth’s temperature? Do you really believe the temperature of the is controlled by the Sun.

    Oh no, you believe the temperature of the Earth is controlled by it’s elliptical orbit which causes Winter and Summer. And PKD believed you.

    Let us watch and see what happens with this Sun cycle. It may yet be leading into a minimum. One Sunspot does not change that.

  209. David says:

    “you believe the temperature of the Earth is controlled by it’s elliptical orbit”

    I meant here, that the earth changes position on it’s axis, and gets hemispherically, closer or further away from the sun, not it’s orbit. Could that be the exact reason as to why we get seasons in the first place Shawn ?

    Also answers your question re : “So tell if what you wrote is true ,why is it now Summer in Canada and Winter in Australia?”

    I was waiting to see if, in all your Googles, you would be smart enough to pick up my error in word choice.

    Apparently not.

    With the rest of the spiel, you talking about the sun in general or the sunspot cycle ? Again, you are confusing photosynthetic with electromagnetic.

    To answer your quote, why is it that analogy has been drawn Shawn ? Could the answer lie somewhere, in the fact, that the planet has several layers of atmosphere attached to it. As all the varying sun’s rays strike the earth, they are distributed around the planet’s surface, as light, heat, and other energy. Could also explain the reason as to why meteorites burn up in our atmosphere, and why the shuttle has heat tiles on it’s belly to prevent it from burning up, as it re-enters ?

    “Do you think the atmosphere and it’s millions of variations does not affect the Earth’s temperature?”

    Of course it does BUT, are you talking about the atmosphere, or the ionosphere ? There is a massive difference, and me thinks that is where your misunderstandings are based. You are getting the two confused. The SSC only affects the ionosphere.

    Your rebuttal about what the sun is for, is again rubbish. Why do you think there is such a raging argument out there re AGW ? It is because, this planet’s temperature is controlled by the sun. It warms, or cools the oceans and land masses, and that regulates the weather in our coastal regions. Why do you think, scientists measure the temperatures in our oceans Shawn ? That is the argument. If we continue to pollute our atmosphere, the suns rays will not be able to penetrate, and that is where the warmanistas/coldanistas jump in with their arguments.

    This planet has no (known), geothermal energy source. So it gets all it’s heat from the star it orbits. Your argument about the atmosphere causing the varying changes of temperature is partially correct, but where do you think those variations originate from ?

    The new ssc has begun, admittedly with a whimper, not a bang, but that is the way it is sometimes. As to the argument re the extent of the new ssc, who knows ? The Maunder scenario has been dispelled, so only time will tell what will occur in the upcoming months and years.

  210. David says:

    Perhaps if things really get bad Phill, we can all move here ?

  211. David says:

    I meant Shawn

  212. Shawn Whelan says:

    “Gee, might be, that the Earth travels slightly eliptically around the sun, and takes a year to do it ? Closer to the sun, funny, we get warmer temps and we call it Summer, further away, we get Winter. Funny about that isn’t it ?’

    That is what you wrote DD.

    Save the porky pies for PKD and JM they might believe you.

    The rest of what you pass off as science is just as ridiculous.
    These guys believe you because they know nothing.

    They believed the Summer and Winter was caused by an elliptical orbit.

    None of the worlds greatest scientists totally understand the relationship of the Sun to the Earth’s temperature.

    The Sun provides the heat and other factors.
    without the sunspots there are many other things going on, such as an abundance of Gamma Rays.

    Try this experiment. Turn your furnace on and turn the thermostat up to maximum. Will the furnace control the temperature?

    Why is Mars so much hotter than the Earth if the Sun if is controlling the temperature? There is a combination of unknown factors that control the temperature of the Earth.

  213. David says:

    Before I go out and enjoy some of this lovely winter sunshine, lets get a few things straight here.

    The rotation of the earth, on it’s axis IS what controls our seasons on this planet. That’s a fact. Ever heard of the concept of “planetary wobble” ?

    The reason as to why Mars has worse climate is simply two factors. Its distance from the sun, and the composition of its atmosphere.

    “There is a combination of unknown factors that control the temperature of the Earth.”

    That is exactly what I have been arguing Shawn ? Shit, you can’t even get your arguments straight in your own mind. Read back through the thread.

    “without the sunspots there are many other things going on, such as an abundance of Gamma Rays.”

    In one word, BULLSHIT !

    If you don’t know that expression, another more polite way of putting it is : WRONG
    That is exactly the reason as to why the ionosphere is there in the first place. To protect us against the increase in radiation, that accompanies the rise and fall of the ssc.

    “Try this experiment. Turn your furnace on and turn the thermostat up to maximum. Will the furnace control the temperature?”

    To a certain degree it will. You are talking about radiant heat. The metal body of the furnace does absorb the heat from it’s internal fire, and redistributes that heat as radiant heat. So what’s your argument again ?

    I mentioned the error regarding the axis slip up, but there it is, I at least admit when I am in error Shawn, what’s your excuse ? Can’t spell google ?

  214. JM says:

    “why is it now Summer in Canada and Winter in Australia?”

    Shawn. David made a slight error in expression when he suggested that “Summer” is due to being closer to the sun, but he did get the basic idea right and your objection that it is now winter in Australia while summer in the north is …

    Plausible, but wrong.

    There are two effects here:-

    1. the tilt of the earth. Summer occurs when sunlight impacts more directly (ie. the sun is higher in the sky). The energy input difference between the north and south hemispheres causes pressure differentials and when they meet at the equator eddies are set up – those become cyclones sometimes.

    2. the elliptical orbit. What happens here is that the Earth is closer to the Sun in Jan and furthest away in July. This changes the energy input to the earth by about 7% over that 6 months and acts like a pump.

    The net effect of both of these is what we call “weather”.

    The oceans and the atmosphere (the climate system in other words) dampen the driving force of the pump and the heat exchange from north to south and back again which is why changes in energy input to the earth don’t cause immediate effects, and also one of the reasons why change in climate is best understood over a long time period.

    (Mathematically speaking it takes a series of about 30 years to remove seasonality from the data and uncover a trend. This applies regardless of any special pleading about volcanos, El Nino and the like – even if those effects weren’t there you would still need to look at 30 years or longer to see what is happening climatically. The common denialist practice of only looking at the last 5-8 years is completely wrong headed.

    Your practice of looking at the last few months, or – when talking about ice – a horse race based on the last couple of weeks – is completely out to lunch)

  215. JM says:

    Whoops, I’m slipping up as well.

    “…The energy input difference …” This should actually just refer to the energy reaching the ground – the tilt of the earth doesn’t affect the energy at the top of the atmosphere. Nonetheless the changes in heat cause circulation in the atmosphere.

    (Sorry for butting in David, I didn’t read your very able defense until just now)

  216. JM says:

    “Why is Mars so much hotter than the Earth if the Sun if is controlling the temperature? ”

    Ahh Shawn, it’s not: (http://www.solarviews.com/eng/mars.htm)

    “The average recorded temperature on Mars is -63° C (-81° F) with a maximum temperature of 20° C (68° F) and a minimum of -140° C (-220° F).”

    It’s colder (the earth’s average is about 14C with a maximum somewhere in the region of 60C)

    You might also be interested in the atmospheric composition:

    “Carbon Dioxide (CO2): 95.32%”

    CO2 tends to make it warmer than it would otherwise be, but because the atmospheric is quite thin, the warming effect is not as spectacular as on Venus.

  217. David says:

    No probs JM.

    The concept of polar axis rotation is difficult to explain in words. With the earth “tilting”, pole to pole, as we progress through our seasons, it is hard without diagrams.

    This explains it better than I ever could. An interesting watch ?

  218. PKD says:

    Save the porky pies for PKD and JM they might believe you.

    No Shawn – the one with the fondness for pork pies is yourself. I didn’t believe them for a minute.

    THe only thing your showing here is your own foolishness…

  219. Iain Hall says:

    Keep going Guys I have a feeling that this thread could hit 300….

  220. David says:

    check this one out guys and gals, pretty scary stuff, and one that the alarmists will really embrace ?

  221. David says:

    Sorry about all the embedding Iain, but there is some wonderful stuff on you tube about this subject.

    In so far as continuing the discussion, hey I’ll play ?

    done the search, for your maximum totals yet ?
    🙂

  222. Iain Hall says:

    No need to apologise David I like the new ability to embed vids in the comments on WordPress I think it helps debate no end 🙂

  223. Ray Dixon says:

    Adding videos now, just to keep it going?

    And I thought we’d dragged attention away to the tat post with the bit about genital piercing. Oh no, this stuff is much more interesting!

  224. David says:

    No, not only to keep the thing going Ray, but there is some great stuff, specially on you tube, re Shawn’s argument about no more sunspots, causes of seasonal change yadda yadda. Explains it better than I could.
    Did you check out the Mayan thing ? Pretty freaky. Scientists, thousands of years later, are still trying to figure out, how the had such an accurate calender ? Why did the entire civilisation just pack up and move ? All this, and the rest of the planet was barely able to walk upright. All pretty interesting stuff, if you are even the slightest bit interested in this stuff ?

  225. Iain Hall says:

    Not yet David but I’m on it 🙂

  226. Iain Hall says:

    Done a lot of checking David and I think that this post does indeed hold the record for the number of comments at this blog.
    So you guys can take a well earned bow for your efforts
    😀

  227. Shawn Whelan says:

    Sounds like Ray is jealous.

  228. Shawn Whelan says:

    DD

    It was an interesting argument.
    It is yet to be seen how this Sun cycle breaks out and
    we will have time to see how this unfolds.

    I think we got off the topic a bit while we beat each other over the head with two by fours.

    I learned a lot from the discussion.

    Youtube is amazing.

    You gotta check out this Solarcycle 24 site.(I realize your as stubborn as a bull) Unlike an open minded guy like me. LOL
    I didn’t realize their radio guys.

    I bet you would be a good guy to drink a few beers with.

    http://solarcycle24.com/

  229. Shawn Whelan says:

    The Mayan thing I have never studied but a guy that knows told me they ran out of numbers. Hence the end date.

    The history of numbering ststems is an interesting thing as is the start of the written language.

  230. David says:

    I also don’t know about their predictions. May happen, may not, but the Mayan pyramids has been a “must see in my lifetime” since seeing Chariots of the Gods thirty some years ago. And, before you say it, I know Daniken supposedly faked his research, but the pictures were indeed superb at the time.

    I had a look at your site, and it seemed to me, that there are a lot of theorists out there, that are taking guesses. As am I, when you break it down. I have had some practical experience with this stuff, as has Phill, and these egg heads haven’t, so when it comes down to it, “each of one, half dozen of the other”, would seem to apply.

    Just been watching the show “Life After People”, on youtube, as I missed most of it, when it was on telly. Now, there is a fascinating scenario ?

    The Mayan thing only goes for about ten minutes Iain, and a fascinating 10 minutes it was/is. As for running out of numbers, who knows. We have heard these doomsday soothsayers so many times before haven’t we ? Not that it can’t happen, would never be arrogant enough to say that. BUT ??????

    Don’t know about the beer thing. I am no genius, but living a solitary life, (at least for the most part), there is little else to do but study the “different” or unusual.

    It’s a fascinating discussion, and one that normally you don’t see, especially in a blog, and for that Iain earns a big gold star !!

    Again, congrats on the record.

    Bring on the next one ????

    🙂

Comments are closed.

Welcome to the Sandpit

I love a good argument so please leave a comment

Please support the Sandpit

Please support the Sandpit

Do you feel lucky?

Do you feel lucky?

%d bloggers like this: