Slashdot Mirror
Big Drop In Solar Activity Could Cool Earth
coondoggie writes "Scientists say the Sun, which roils with flares and electromagnetic energy every 11 years or so, could go into virtual hibernation after the current cycle of high activity, reducing temperatures on Earth. As the current sunspot cycle, Cycle 24, begins to ramp up toward maximum, scientists from the National Solar Observatory and the Air Force Research Laboratory independently found that the Sun's interior, visible surface, and corona indicate the next 11-year solar sunspot cycle, Cycle 25, will be greatly reduced or may not happen at all."
Or that the solar sunspot cycle is the result of humans driving big SUVs
No, they will still find a way to blame humans. Even the next Ice Age will be blamed on human activity. They've simply changed the terminology from Global Warming to Climate Change so that they can never be proven wrong, and always retain their stick with which to beat evil mankind.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
It doesn't but Jesus does.
Global warming nuts are just the left wing's version of Creationists.
Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
Not content that the Earth might cool despite ever increasing CO2, the AGW people will warn of "hidden warming" which is the concept of latent CO2 in the atmosphere which will be activated when the Sun comes back up to speed. They will claim we will very suddenly find ourselves in the same position had cooling not occurred.
But it will have occurred despite the CO2, meaning that the Sun, not CO2 is the driving force of climate, thus disproving the CO2 dominance theory of AGW proponents.
I personally am eager to see what the oceans do. It would be a major to discover that the oceans have been releasing the CO2 in response to an active Sun. The oceans could even revert to CO2 sinks if the cooling is severe enough. Interesting times are ahead...
Slashdot's rate-of-post filter: Preventing you from posting too many great ideas at once.
Then how about that is your talking point rather than make up stories of gloom and doom? I agree with everything you're saying about human impact, but let's make that the main part of your campaign, rather than this global warming nonsense. The problem is, Gore and company choose the latter, and lost credibility as a leader for these issues.
Let's go with the facts: Humans use a lot of resources. We don't know what effect they have on the planet, so let's try to be conservative and waste as little as possible. Let's try to use renewable resources, because that will reduce our carbon footprint, and help improve air quality in populated areas. Doesn't that sound much more reasonable than gloom and doom "we're causing the earth's temperature to rise oh no"?
It's all about getting the facts. The fact is, the impact humans can make to change global temperature is... well we really have no clue, it's all guessing.
Oh please don't forget the hypocrisy! Al Gore farts around in his personal LEAR JET while having the giant brass balls to tell us to take the bus and claim said jet is "carbon neutral" because he pays himself carbon credits from his own company while being driven in limos and going home to a McMansion so big you could put 14 families in the thing and they'd STILL be comfortable, yet we are supposed to 'suffer for the planet" so Al and his friends can become carbon billionaires. Yeah go fuck yourself Al. He reminds me of another Al, Al Sharpton. Like Sharpton his ass is only in front of the camera when he thinks he can push his personal agenda, which also ends up being "put money in Al's pockets".
So until the whole global warming group gets together and says "Go fuck yourself Al, you are about as useful to the cause as Sharpton is to race relations" I'll be happily supporting anyone AGAINST them. I've found hypocrisy is the surest sign of corruption, and as someone who has driven by Al's house (you really ought to see that fucker, the thing is HUGE!) I'd say that he is the biggest hypocrite that ever drew a breath. If they would have chosen Begly JR that is one thing, he actually walks the walk. But anything Al is involved in will ALWAYS have the same conclusion...money out of YOUR pocket and into AL's. Anyone who after the Lear jet looks at Al as anything but a white Sharpton frankly has drank too much of the AGW koolaid.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
Most of the universe's environments are hostile to life as we know it, and even on Earth life has only existed for a very short time.
For the short time life on Earth has existed it's actually changed a great deal, with countless species becoming extinct as the conditions necessary for their continued survival have changed. As a member of one of those species that might someday become extinct, I think it is fair to worry about how manmade changes to the environment might precipitate our demise. Life might go on, but humans might not. I think it's that last bit that tends to worry climate scientists.
Wrong.
"In prison you just have to shut your eyes and take it. Here you have to shut your eyes and give it."
The null hypothesis is disproven. For years and years. The only one railing on about the heat island effect and station placement is Watts, our favourite weatherman without a scientific clue but a huge agenda. Best you can claim is that warming is not anthropogenic, and if you want to claim that, please present an explanation for it.
Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.