 |
|
| Science Forum Index » Environment Forum » THE SUN DEFINES THE CLIMATE!!... |
|
Page 1 of 2 Goto page 1, 2 Next |
|
| Author |
Message |
| Last Post... |
 Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 8:54 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
THE SUN DEFINES THE CLIMATE
by Habibullo Abdussamatov, Dr. Sc. -
Head of Space research laboratory of the Pulkovo ObservatoryTuesday,
October 27th 2009, 2:52 PM EDT
Co2sceptic (Site Admin)
article image
(translated from Russian by Lucy Hancock
http://climaterealists.com/index.php?id=4254&linkbox=true
Key Excerpts: Observations of the Sun show that as for the increase in
temperature, carbon dioxide is “not guilty” and as for what lies ahead
in the upcoming decades, it is not catastrophic warming, but a global,
and very prolonged, temperature drop. [...] Over the past decade,
global temperature on the Earth has not increased; global warming has
ceased, and already there are signs of the future deep temperature
drop. [...] It follows that warming had a natural origin, the
contribution of CO2 to it was insignificant, anthropogenic increase in
the concentration of carbon dioxide does not serve as an explanation
for it, and in the foreseeable future CO2 will not be able to cause
catastrophic warming. The so-called greenhouse effect will not avert
the onset of the next deep temperature drop, the 19th in the last 7500
years, which without fail follows after natural warming. [...]
We should fear a deep temperature drop—not catastrophic global
warming. Humanity must survive the serious economic, social,
demographic and political consequences of a global temperature drop,
which will directly affect the national interests of almost all
countries and more than 80% of the population of the Earth. A deep
temperature drop is a considerably greater threat to humanity than
warming. However, a reliable forecast of the time of the onset and of
the depth of the global temperature drop will make it possible to
adjust in advance the economic activity of humanity, to considerably
weaken the crisis.
Experts of the United Nations in regular reports publish data said to
show that the Earth is approaching a catastrophic global warming,
caused by increasing emissions of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere.
However, observations of the Sun show that as for the increase in
temperature, carbon dioxide is “not guilty” and as for what lies ahead
in the upcoming decades, it is not catastrophic warming, but a global,
and very prolonged, temperature drop.
Life on earth completely depends on solar radiation, the ultimate
source of energy for natural processes. For a long time it was thought
that the luminosity of the Sun never changes, and for this reason the
quantity of solar energy received per second over one square meter
above the atmosphere at the distance of the Earth from the Sun
(149,597,892 km), was named the solar constant.
Until 1978, precise measurements of the value of the total solar
irradiance (TSI) were not available. But according to indirect data,
namely the established major climate variations of the Earth in recent
millennia, one must doubt the invariance of its value.
In the middle of the nineteenth century, German and Swiss astronomers
Heinrich Schwabe and Rudolf Wolf established that the number of spots
on the surface of the Sun periodically changes, diminishing from a
maximum to a minimum, and then growing again, over a time frame on the
order of 11 years. Wolf introduced an index ("W") of the relative
number of sunspots, computed as the sum of 10 times number of sunspot
groups plus the total number of spots in all groups. This number has
been regularly measured since 1849. Drawing on the work of
professional astronomers and the observations of amateurs (which are
of uncertain reliability) Wolf worked out a reconstruction of monthly
values from 1749 as well as annual values from 1700. Today, the
reconstruction of this time series stretches back to 1611. It has an
eleven-year cycle of recurrence as well as other cycles related to
onset and development of individual sunspot groups: changes in the
fraction of the solar surface occupied by faculae, the frequency of
prominences, and other phenomena in the solar chromosphere and corona.
Analyzing the long record of sunspot numbers, the English astronomer
Walter Maunder in 1893 came to the conclusion that from 1645 to 1715
sunspots had been generally absent. Over the thirty-year period of the
Maunder Minimum, astronomers of the time counted only about 50 spots.
Usually, over that length of time, about 50,000 sunspots would appear.
Today, it has been established that such minima have repeatedly
occurred in the past. It is also known that the Maunder Minimum
accompanied the coldest phase of a global temperature dip, physically
measured in Europe and other regions, the most severe such dip for
several millennia, which stretched from the fourteenth to the
nineteenth centuries (now known as the Little Ice Age).
The search for a relationship between large climate variations and
phenomena observed in the Sun led to an interest in finding a
connection between periods of change in the terrestrial climate and
corresponding significant changes in the level of observed solar
activity, because the sunspot number is the only index that has been
measured over a long period of time.
Determinative role of the Sun in variations in the climate of the
Earth
The Earth, after receiving and storing over the twentieth century an
anomalously large amount of heat energy, from the 1990’s began to
return it gradually. The upper layers of the world ocean, completely
unexpectedly to climatologists, began to cool in 2003. The heat
accumulated by them unfortunately now is running out. Over the past
decade, global temperature on the Earth has not increased; global
warming has ceased, and already there are signs of the future deep
temperature drop. Meantime the concentration of carbon dioxide in the
atmosphere over these years has grown by more than 4%, and in 2006
many meteorologists predicted that 2007 would be the hottest of the
last decade. This did not occur, although the global temperature of
the Earth would have increased at least 0.1 degree if it depended on
the concentration of carbon dioxide. It follows that warming had a
natural origin, the contribution of CO2 to it was insignificant,
anthropogenic increase in the concentration of carbon dioxide does not
serve as an explanation for it, and in the foreseeable future CO2 will
not be able to cause catastrophic warming. The so-called greenhouse
effect will not avert the onset of the next deep temperature drop, the
19th in the last 7500 years, which without fail follows after natural
warming.
The earth is no longer threatened by the catastrophic global warming
forecast by some scientists; warming passed its peak in 1998-2005,
while the value of the TSI by July - September of last year had
already declined by 0.47 W/m2.
For several years until the beginning in 2013 of a steady temperature
drop, in a phase of instability, temperature will oscillate around the
maximum that has been reached, without further substantial rise.
Changes in climatic conditions will occur unevenly, depending on
latitude. A temperature decrease in the smallest degree would affect
the equatorial regions and strongly influence the temperate climate
zones. The changes will have very serious consequences, and it is
necessary to begin preparations even now, since there is practically
no time in reserve. The global temperature of the Earth has begun its
decrease without limitations on the volume of greenhouse gas emissions
by industrially developed countries; therefore the implementation of
the Kyoto protocol aimed to rescue the planet from the greenhouse
effect should be put off at least 150 years.
Consequently, we should fear a deep temperature drop—not catastrophic
global warming. Humanity must survive the serious economic, social,
demographic and political consequences of a global temperature drop,
which will directly affect the national interests of almost all
countries and more than 80% of the population of the Earth. A deep
temperature drop is a considerably greater threat to humanity than
warming. However, a reliable forecast of the time of the onset and of
the depth of the global temperature drop will make it possible to
adjust in advance the economic activity of humanity, to considerably
weaken the crisis. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| erschroedinger at (no spam) gmail.com... |
| Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 10:43 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 3, 2:02 pm, Last Post <last_p... at (no spam) primus.ca> wrote:
[quote] THE SUN DEFINES THE CLIMATE
by Habibullo Abdussamatov, Dr. Sc. -
Head of Space research laboratory of
the Pulkovo Observatory
October 27th 2009, 2:52 PM EDT
Co2sceptic (Site Admin)
article image
(translated from Russian by Lucy Hancockhttp://climaterealists.comindex.php?id=4254&linkbox=true
Key Excerpts: Observations of the Sun show that as for the increase in
emperature, carbon dioxide is “not guilty” and as for what lies ahead
n the upcoming decades, it is not catastrophic warming, but a global,
nd very prolonged, temperature drop. [...] Over the past decade,
lobal temperature on the Earth has not increased; global warming has
ceased, and already there are signs of the future deep temperature
drop. [...] It follows that warming had a natural origin, the
contribution of CO2 to it was insignificant, anthropogenic increase
in
the concentration of carbon dioxide does not serve as an explanation
for it, and in the foreseeable future CO2 will not be able to cause
catastrophic warming. The so-called greenhouse effect will not avert
the onset of the next deep temperature drop, the 19th in the last
7500
years, which without fail follows after natural warming. [...]
We should fear a deep temperature drop—not catastrophic global
warming. Humanity must survive the serious economic, social,
demographic and political consequences of a global temperature drop,
which will directly affect the national interests of almost all
countries and more than 80% of the population of the Earth. A deep
temperature drop is a considerably greater threat to humanity than
warming. However, a reliable forecast of the time of the onset and of
the depth of the global temperature drop will make it possible to
adjust in advance the economic activity of humanity, to considerably
weaken the crisis.
Experts of the United Nations in regular reports publish data said to
show that the Earth is approaching a catastrophic global warming,
caused by increasing emissions of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere.
However, observations of the Sun show that as for the increase in
temperature, carbon dioxide is “not guilty” and as for what lies
ahead
in the upcoming decades, it is not catastrophic warming, but a
global,
and very prolonged, temperature drop.
Life on earth completely depends on solar radiation, the ultimate
source of energy for natural processes. For a long time it was
thought
that the luminosity of the Sun never changes, and for this reason the
quantity of solar energy received per second over one square meter
above the atmosphere at the distance of the Earth from the Sun
(149,597,892 km), was named the solar constant.
Until 1978, precise measurements of the value of the total solar
irradiance (TSI) were not available. But according to indirect data,
namely the established major climate variations of the Earth in
recent
millennia, one must doubt the invariance of its value.
In the middle of the nineteenth century, German and Swiss astronomers
Heinrich Schwabe and Rudolf Wolf established that the number of spots
on the surface of the Sun periodically changes, diminishing from a
maximum to a minimum, and then growing again, over a time frame on
the
order of 11 years. Wolf introduced an index ("W") of the relative
number of sunspots, computed as the sum of 10 times number of sunspot
groups plus the total number of spots in all groups. This number has
been regularly measured since 1849. Drawing on the work of
professional astronomers and the observations of amateurs (which are
of uncertain reliability) Wolf worked out a reconstruction of monthly
values from 1749 as well as annual values from 1700. Today, the
reconstruction of this time series stretches back to 1611. It has an
eleven-year cycle of recurrence as well as other cycles related to
onset and development of individual sunspot groups: changes in the
fraction of the solar surface occupied by faculae, the frequency of
prominences, and other phenomena in the solar chromosphere and
corona.
Analyzing the long record of sunspot numbers, the English astronomer
Walter Maunder in 1893 came to the conclusion that from 1645 to 1715
sunspots had been generally absent. Over the thirty-year period of
the
Maunder Minimum, astronomers of the time counted only about 50 spots.
Usually, over that length of time, about 50,000 sunspots would
appear.
Today, it has been established that such minima have repeatedly
occurred in the past. It is also known that the Maunder Minimum
accompanied the coldest phase of a global temperature dip, physically
measured in Europe and other regions, the most severe such dip for
several millennia, which stretched from the fourteenth to the
nineteenth centuries (now known as the Little Ice Age).
The search for a relationship between large climate variations and
phenomena observed in the Sun led to an interest in finding a
connection between periods of change in the terrestrial climate and
corresponding significant changes in the level of observed solar
activity, because the sunspot number is the only index that has been
measured over a long period of time.
Determinative role of the Sun in variations in the climate of the
Earth
The Earth, after receiving and storing over the twentieth century an
anomalously large amount of heat energy, from the 1990’s began to
return it gradually. The upper layers of the world ocean, completely
unexpectedly to climatologists, began to cool in 2003. The heat
accumulated by them unfortunately now is running out. Over the past
decade, global temperature on the Earth has not increased; global
warming has ceased, and already there are signs of the future deep
temperature drop. Meantime the concentration of carbon dioxide in the
atmosphere over these years has grown by more than 4%, and in 2006
many meteorologists predicted that 2007 would be the hottest of the
last decade. This did not occur, although the global temperature of
the Earth would have increased at least 0.1 degree if it depended on
the concentration of carbon dioxide. It follows that warming had a
natural origin, the contribution of CO2 to it was insignificant,
anthropogenic increase in the concentration of carbon dioxide does
not
serve as an explanation for it, and in the foreseeable future CO2
will
not be able to cause catastrophic warming. The so-called greenhouse
effect will not avert the onset of the next deep temperature drop,
the
19th in the last 7500 years, which without fail follows after natural
warming.
The earth is no longer threatened by the catastrophic global warming
forecast by some scientists; warming passed its peak in 1998-2005,
while the value of the TSI by July - September of last year had
already declined by 0.47 W/m2.
For several years until the beginning in 2013 of a steady temperature
drop, in a phase of instability, temperature will oscillate around
the
maximum that has been reached, without further substantial rise.
Changes in climatic conditions will occur unevenly, depending on
latitude. A temperature decrease in the smallest degree would affect
the equatorial regions and strongly influence the temperate climate
zones. The changes will have very serious consequences, and it is
necessary to begin preparations even now, since there is practically
no time in reserve. The global temperature of the Earth has begun its
decrease without limitations on the volume of greenhouse gas
emissions
by industrially developed countries; therefore the implementation of
the Kyoto protocol aimed to rescue the planet from the greenhouse
effect should be put off at least 150 years.
Consequently, we should fear a deep temperature drop—not catastrophic
global warming. Humanity must survive the serious economic, social,
demographic and political consequences of a global temperature drop,
which will directly affect the national interests of almost all
countries and more than 80% of the population of the Earth. A deep
temperature drop is a considerably greater threat to humanity than
warming. However, a reliable forecast of the time of the onset and of
the depth of the global temperature drop will make it possible to
adjust in advance the economic activity of humanity, to considerably
weaken the crisis.
[/quote]
"His views [that Mars warming proves the earth warming is due to the
sun] are completely at odds with the mainstream scientific opinion,"
said Colin Wilson, a planetary physicist at England's Oxford
University.
"And they contradict the extensive evidence presented in the most
recent IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change]
report." (Related: "Global Warming 'Very Likely' Caused by Humans,
World Climate Experts Say" [February 2, 2007].)
Amato Evan, a climate scientist at the University of Wisconsin,
Madison, added that "the idea just isn't supported by the theory or by
the observations."
Perhaps the biggest stumbling block in Abdussamatov's theory is his
dismissal of the greenhouse effect, in which atmospheric gases such as
carbon dioxide help keep heat trapped near the planet's surface.
He claims that carbon dioxide has only a small influence on Earth's
climate and virtually no influence on Mars.
But "without the greenhouse effect there would be very little, if any,
life on Earth, since our planet would pretty much be a big ball of
ice," said Evan, of the University of Wisconsin. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| richp... |
| Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 12:53 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 3, 11:06 am, "Ouroboros Rex" <i... at (no spam) casual.com> wrote:
[quote]Last Post wrote:
THE SUN DEFINES THE CLIMATE
by Habibullo Abdussamatov, Dr. Sc. -
...denialist liar.
[/quote]
What do you expect from last piss ooops I mean post |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Ouroboros Rex... |
| Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 2:06 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Last Post wrote:
[quote]THE SUN DEFINES THE CLIMATE
by Habibullo Abdussamatov, Dr. Sc. -
[/quote]
....denialist liar. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| richp... |
| Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 3:07 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 3, 11:02 am, Last Post <last_p... at (no spam) primus.ca> wrote:
[quote] THE SUN DEFINES THE CLIMATE
by Habibullo Abdussamatov, Dr. Sc. -
Head of Space research laboratory of
the Pulkovo Observatory
October 27th 2009, 2:52 PM EDT
Co2sceptic (Site Admin)
article image
(translated from Russian by Lucy Hancockhttp://climaterealists.comindex.php?id=4254&linkbox=true
Key Excerpts: Observations of the Sun show that as for the increase in
emperature, carbon dioxide is “not guilty” and as for what lies ahead
n the upcoming decades, it is not catastrophic warming, but a global,
nd very prolonged, temperature drop. [...] Over the past decade,
lobal temperature on the Earth has not increased; global warming has
ceased, and already there are signs of the future deep temperature
drop. [...] It follows that warming had a natural origin, the
contribution of CO2 to it was insignificant, anthropogenic increase
in
the concentration of carbon dioxide does not serve as an explanation
for it, and in the foreseeable future CO2 will not be able to cause
catastrophic warming. The so-called greenhouse effect will not avert
the onset of the next deep temperature drop, the 19th in the last
7500
years, which without fail follows after natural warming. [...]
We should fear a deep temperature drop—not catastrophic global
warming. Humanity must survive the serious economic, social,
demographic and political consequences of a global temperature drop,
which will directly affect the national interests of almost all
countries and more than 80% of the population of the Earth. A deep
temperature drop is a considerably greater threat to humanity than
warming. However, a reliable forecast of the time of the onset and of
the depth of the global temperature drop will make it possible to
adjust in advance the economic activity of humanity, to considerably
weaken the crisis.
Experts of the United Nations in regular reports publish data said to
show that the Earth is approaching a catastrophic global warming,
caused by increasing emissions of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere.
However, observations of the Sun show that as for the increase in
temperature, carbon dioxide is “not guilty” and as for what lies
ahead
in the upcoming decades, it is not catastrophic warming, but a
global,
and very prolonged, temperature drop.
Life on earth completely depends on solar radiation, the ultimate
source of energy for natural processes. For a long time it was
thought
that the luminosity of the Sun never changes, and for this reason the
quantity of solar energy received per second over one square meter
above the atmosphere at the distance of the Earth from the Sun
(149,597,892 km), was named the solar constant.
Until 1978, precise measurements of the value of the total solar
irradiance (TSI) were not available. But according to indirect data,
namely the established major climate variations of the Earth in
recent
millennia, one must doubt the invariance of its value.
In the middle of the nineteenth century, German and Swiss astronomers
Heinrich Schwabe and Rudolf Wolf established that the number of spots
on the surface of the Sun periodically changes, diminishing from a
maximum to a minimum, and then growing again, over a time frame on
the
order of 11 years. Wolf introduced an index ("W") of the relative
number of sunspots, computed as the sum of 10 times number of sunspot
groups plus the total number of spots in all groups. This number has
been regularly measured since 1849. Drawing on the work of
professional astronomers and the observations of amateurs (which are
of uncertain reliability) Wolf worked out a reconstruction of monthly
values from 1749 as well as annual values from 1700. Today, the
reconstruction of this time series stretches back to 1611. It has an
eleven-year cycle of recurrence as well as other cycles related to
onset and development of individual sunspot groups: changes in the
fraction of the solar surface occupied by faculae, the frequency of
prominences, and other phenomena in the solar chromosphere and
corona.
Analyzing the long record of sunspot numbers, the English astronomer
Walter Maunder in 1893 came to the conclusion that from 1645 to 1715
sunspots had been generally absent. Over the thirty-year period of
the
Maunder Minimum, astronomers of the time counted only about 50 spots.
Usually, over that length of time, about 50,000 sunspots would
appear.
Today, it has been established that such minima have repeatedly
occurred in the past. It is also known that the Maunder Minimum
accompanied the coldest phase of a global temperature dip, physically
measured in Europe and other regions, the most severe such dip for
several millennia, which stretched from the fourteenth to the
nineteenth centuries (now known as the Little Ice Age).
The search for a relationship between large climate variations and
phenomena observed in the Sun led to an interest in finding a
connection between periods of change in the terrestrial climate and
corresponding significant changes in the level of observed solar
activity, because the sunspot number is the only index that has been
measured over a long period of time.
Determinative role of the Sun in variations in the climate of the
Earth
The Earth, after receiving and storing over the twentieth century an
anomalously large amount of heat energy, from the 1990’s began to
return it gradually. The upper layers of the world ocean, completely
unexpectedly to climatologists, began to cool in 2003. The heat
accumulated by them unfortunately now is running out. Over the past
decade, global temperature on the Earth has not increased; global
warming has ceased, and already there are signs of the future deep
temperature drop. Meantime the concentration of carbon dioxide in the
atmosphere over these years has grown by more than 4%, and in 2006
many meteorologists predicted that 2007 would be the hottest of the
last decade. This did not occur, although the global temperature of
the Earth would have increased at least 0.1 degree if it depended on
the concentration of carbon dioxide. It follows that warming had a
natural origin, the contribution of CO2 to it was insignificant,
anthropogenic increase in the concentration of carbon dioxide does
not
serve as an explanation for it, and in the foreseeable future CO2
will
not be able to cause catastrophic warming. The so-called greenhouse
effect will not avert the onset of the next deep temperature drop,
the
19th in the last 7500 years, which without fail follows after natural
warming.
The earth is no longer threatened by the catastrophic global warming
forecast by some scientists; warming passed its peak in 1998-2005,
while the value of the TSI by July - September of last year had
already declined by 0.47 W/m2.
For several years until the beginning in 2013 of a steady temperature
drop, in a phase of instability, temperature will oscillate around
the
maximum that has been reached, without further substantial rise.
Changes in climatic conditions will occur unevenly, depending on
latitude. A temperature decrease in the smallest degree would affect
the equatorial regions and strongly influence the temperate climate
zones. The changes will have very serious consequences, and it is
necessary to begin preparations even now, since there is practically
no time in reserve. The global temperature of the Earth has begun its
decrease without limitations on the volume of greenhouse gas
emissions
by industrially developed countries; therefore the implementation of
the Kyoto protocol aimed to rescue the planet from the greenhouse
effect should be put off at least 150 years.
Consequently, we should fear a deep temperature drop—not catastrophic
global warming. Humanity must survive the serious economic, social,
demographic and political consequences of a global temperature drop,
which will directly affect the national interests of almost all
countries and more than 80% of the population of the Earth. A deep
temperature drop is a considerably greater threat to humanity than
warming. However, a reliable forecast of the time of the onset and of
the depth of the global temperature drop will make it possible to
adjust in advance the economic activity of humanity, to considerably
weaken the crisis.
[/quote]
Hey moron a lot of things define climate you jackass |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Last Post... |
| Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 7:59 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 3, 5:53 pm, richp <travelingman95... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Nov 3, 11:06 am, "Ouroboros Rex" <i... at (no spam) casual.com> wrote:
Last Post wrote:
THE SUN DEFINES THE CLIMATE
by Habibullo Abdussamatov, Dr. Sc. -
...denialist liar.
What do you expect from last piss ooops I mean post
[/quote]
•• Indeed pissypants you are as wrong here
as you always are.
•• You, sourberries, and Lloyd Parker make no. sense at all. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Last Post... |
| Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 8:03 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 3, 8:07 pm, richp <travelingman95... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Nov 3, 11:02 am, Last Post <last_p... at (no spam) primus.ca> wrote:
THE SUN DEFINES THE CLIMATE
by Habibullo Abdussamatov, Dr. Sc. -
Head of Space research laboratory of
the Pulkovo Observatory
October 27th 2009, 2:52 PM EDT
Co2sceptic (Site Admin)
article image
(translated from Russian by Lucy Hancockhttp://climaterealists.comindex.php?id=4254&linkbox=true
Key Excerpts: Observations of the Sun show that as for the increase in
emperature, carbon dioxide is “not guilty” and as for what lies ahead
n the upcoming decades, it is not catastrophic warming, but a global,
nd very prolonged, temperature drop. [...] Over the past decade,
lobal temperature on the Earth has not increased; global warming has
ceased, and already there are signs of the future deep temperature
drop. [...] It follows that warming had a natural origin, the
contribution of CO2 to it was insignificant, anthropogenic increase
in
the concentration of carbon dioxide does not serve as an explanation
for it, and in the foreseeable future CO2 will not be able to cause
catastrophic warming. The so-called greenhouse effect will not avert
the onset of the next deep temperature drop, the 19th in the last
7500
years, which without fail follows after natural warming. [...]
We should fear a deep temperature drop—not catastrophic global
warming. Humanity must survive the serious economic, social,
demographic and political consequences of a global temperature drop,
which will directly affect the national interests of almost all
countries and more than 80% of the population of the Earth. A deep
temperature drop is a considerably greater threat to humanity than
warming. However, a reliable forecast of the time of the onset and of
the depth of the global temperature drop will make it possible to
adjust in advance the economic activity of humanity, to considerably
weaken the crisis.
Experts of the United Nations in regular reports publish data said to
show that the Earth is approaching a catastrophic global warming,
caused by increasing emissions of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere.
However, observations of the Sun show that as for the increase in
temperature, carbon dioxide is “not guilty” and as for what lies
ahead
in the upcoming decades, it is not catastrophic warming, but a
global,
and very prolonged, temperature drop.
Life on earth completely depends on solar radiation, the ultimate
source of energy for natural processes. For a long time it was
thought
that the luminosity of the Sun never changes, and for this reason the
quantity of solar energy received per second over one square meter
above the atmosphere at the distance of the Earth from the Sun
(149,597,892 km), was named the solar constant.
Until 1978, precise measurements of the value of the total solar
irradiance (TSI) were not available. But according to indirect data,
namely the established major climate variations of the Earth in
recent
millennia, one must doubt the invariance of its value.
In the middle of the nineteenth century, German and Swiss astronomers
Heinrich Schwabe and Rudolf Wolf established that the number of spots
on the surface of the Sun periodically changes, diminishing from a
maximum to a minimum, and then growing again, over a time frame on
the
order of 11 years. Wolf introduced an index ("W") of the relative
number of sunspots, computed as the sum of 10 times number of sunspot
groups plus the total number of spots in all groups. This number has
been regularly measured since 1849. Drawing on the work of
professional astronomers and the observations of amateurs (which are
of uncertain reliability) Wolf worked out a reconstruction of monthly
values from 1749 as well as annual values from 1700. Today, the
reconstruction of this time series stretches back to 1611. It has an
eleven-year cycle of recurrence as well as other cycles related to
onset and development of individual sunspot groups: changes in the
fraction of the solar surface occupied by faculae, the frequency of
prominences, and other phenomena in the solar chromosphere and
corona.
Analyzing the long record of sunspot numbers, the English astronomer
Walter Maunder in 1893 came to the conclusion that from 1645 to 1715
sunspots had been generally absent. Over the thirty-year period of
the
Maunder Minimum, astronomers of the time counted only about 50 spots..
Usually, over that length of time, about 50,000 sunspots would
appear.
Today, it has been established that such minima have repeatedly
occurred in the past. It is also known that the Maunder Minimum
accompanied the coldest phase of a global temperature dip, physically
measured in Europe and other regions, the most severe such dip for
several millennia, which stretched from the fourteenth to the
nineteenth centuries (now known as the Little Ice Age).
The search for a relationship between large climate variations and
phenomena observed in the Sun led to an interest in finding a
connection between periods of change in the terrestrial climate and
corresponding significant changes in the level of observed solar
activity, because the sunspot number is the only index that has been
measured over a long period of time.
Determinative role of the Sun in variations in the climate of the
Earth
The Earth, after receiving and storing over the twentieth century an
anomalously large amount of heat energy, from the 1990’s began to
return it gradually. The upper layers of the world ocean, completely
unexpectedly to climatologists, began to cool in 2003. The heat
accumulated by them unfortunately now is running out. Over the past
decade, global temperature on the Earth has not increased; global
warming has ceased, and already there are signs of the future deep
temperature drop. Meantime the concentration of carbon dioxide in the
atmosphere over these years has grown by more than 4%, and in 2006
many meteorologists predicted that 2007 would be the hottest of the
last decade. This did not occur, although the global temperature of
the Earth would have increased at least 0.1 degree if it depended on
the concentration of carbon dioxide. It follows that warming had a
natural origin, the contribution of CO2 to it was insignificant,
anthropogenic increase in the concentration of carbon dioxide does
not
serve as an explanation for it, and in the foreseeable future CO2
will
not be able to cause catastrophic warming. The so-called greenhouse
effect will not avert the onset of the next deep temperature drop,
the
19th in the last 7500 years, which without fail follows after natural
warming.
The earth is no longer threatened by the catastrophic global warming
forecast by some scientists; warming passed its peak in 1998-2005,
while the value of the TSI by July - September of last year had
already declined by 0.47 W/m2.
For several years until the beginning in 2013 of a steady temperature
drop, in a phase of instability, temperature will oscillate around
the
maximum that has been reached, without further substantial rise.
Changes in climatic conditions will occur unevenly, depending on
latitude. A temperature decrease in the smallest degree would affect
the equatorial regions and strongly influence the temperate climate
zones. The changes will have very serious consequences, and it is
necessary to begin preparations even now, since there is practically
no time in reserve. The global temperature of the Earth has begun its
decrease without limitations on the volume of greenhouse gas
emissions
by industrially developed countries; therefore the implementation of
the Kyoto protocol aimed to rescue the planet from the greenhouse
effect should be put off at least 150 years.
Consequently, we should fear a deep temperature drop—not catastrophic
global warming. Humanity must survive the serious economic, social,
demographic and political consequences of a global temperature drop,
which will directly affect the national interests of almost all
countries and more than 80% of the population of the Earth. A deep
temperature drop is a considerably greater threat to humanity than
warming. However, a reliable forecast of the time of the onset and of
the depth of the global temperature drop will make it possible to
adjust in advance the economic activity of humanity, to considerably
weaken the crisis.
Hey moron a lot of things define climate you jackass
[/quote]
•• Those who would call others, "moron"
need only look in a mirror to see a real one. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Last Post... |
| Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 9:02 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 3, 3:43Â pm, "erschroedin... at (no spam) gmail.com"
<erschroedin... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Nov 3, 2:02Â pm, Last Post <last_p... at (no spam) primus.ca> wrote:
 THE SUN DEFINES THE CLIMATE
  by Habibullo Abdussamatov, Dr. Sc. -
  Head of Space research laboratory of
 the Pulkovo Observatory
 October 27th 2009, 2:52 PM EDT
 article image
 (translated from Russian by Lucy Hancock
[/quote]
climaterealists.comindex.php?id=4254&linkbox=true
[quote]
Key Excerpts: Observations of the Sun show that as for the increase in
 emperature, carbon dioxide is “not guilty” and as for what lies ahead
 n the upcoming decades, it is not catastrophic warming, but a global,
 nd very prolonged, temperature drop. [...] Over the past decade,
 lobal temperature on the Earth has not increased; global warming has
 ceased, and already there are signs of the future deep temperature
 drop. [...] It follows that warming had a natural origin, the
 contribution of CO2 to it was insignificant, anthropogenic increase
in
 the concentration of carbon dioxide does not serve as an explanation
 for it, and in the foreseeable future CO2 will not be able to cause
 catastrophic warming. The so-called greenhouse effect will not avert
 the onset of the next deep temperature drop, the 19th in the last
7500
 years, which without fail follows after natural warming. [...]
 We should fear a deep temperature drop—not catastrophic global
 warming. Humanity must survive the serious economic, social,
 demographic and political consequences of a global temperature drop,
 which will directly affect the national interests of almost all
 countries and more than 80% of the population of the Earth. A deep
 temperature drop is a considerably greater threat to humanity than
 warming. However, a reliable forecast of the time of the onset and of
 the depth of the global temperature drop will make it possible to
 adjust in advance the economic activity of humanity, to considerably
 weaken the crisis.
 Experts of the United Nations in regular reports publish data said to
 show that the Earth is approaching a catastrophic global warming,
 caused by increasing emissions of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere.
 However, observations of the Sun show that as for the increase in
 temperature, carbon dioxide is “not guilty” and as for what lies
ahead
 in the upcoming decades, it is not catastrophic warming, but a
global,
 and very prolonged, temperature drop.
 Life on earth completely depends on solar radiation, the ultimate
 source of energy for natural processes. For a long time it was
thought
 that the luminosity of the Sun never changes, and for this reason the
 quantity of solar energy received per second over one square meter
 above the atmosphere at the distance of the Earth from the Sun
 (149,597,892 km), was named the solar constant.
 Until 1978, precise measurements of the value of the total solar
 irradiance (TSI) were not available. But according to indirect data,
 namely the established major climate variations of the Earth in
recent
 millennia, one must doubt the invariance of its value.
 In the middle of the nineteenth century, German and Swiss astronomers
 Heinrich Schwabe and Rudolf Wolf established that the number of spots
 on the surface of the Sun periodically changes, diminishing from a
 maximum to a minimum, and then growing again, over a time frame on
the
 order of 11 years. Wolf introduced an index ("W") of the relative
 number of sunspots, computed as the sum of 10 times number of sunspot
 groups plus the total number of spots in all groups. This number has
been regularly measured since 1849. Drawing on the work of
professional astronomers and the observations of amateurs (which are
 of uncertain reliability) Wolf worked out a reconstruction of monthly
 values from 1749 as well as annual values from 1700. Today, the
 reconstruction of this time series stretches back to 1611. It has an
 eleven-year cycle of recurrence as well as other cycles related to
 onset and development of individual sunspot groups: changes in the
 fraction of the solar surface occupied by faculae, the frequency of
 prominences, and other phenomena in the solar chromosphere and
corona.
 Analyzing the long record of sunspot numbers, the English astronomer
 Walter Maunder in 1893 came to the conclusion that from 1645 to 1715
 sunspots had been generally absent. Over the thirty-year period of
the
 Maunder Minimum, astronomers of the time counted only about 50 spots.
 Usually, over that length of time, about 50,000 sunspots would
appear.
 Today, it has been established that such minima have repeatedly
 occurred in the past. It is also known that the Maunder Minimum
 accompanied the coldest phase of a global temperature dip, physically
 measured in Europe and other regions, the most severe such dip for
 several millennia, which stretched from the fourteenth to the
 nineteenth centuries (now known as the Little Ice Age).
 The search for a relationship between large climate variations and
 phenomena observed in the Sun led to an interest in finding a
 connection between periods of change in the terrestrial climate and
 corresponding significant changes in the level of observed solar
 activity, because the sunspot number is the only index that has been
 measured over a long period of time.
 Determinative role of the Sun in variations in the climate of the
 Earth
 The Earth, after receiving and storing over the twentieth century an
 anomalously large amount of heat energy, from the 1990’s began to
 return it gradually. The upper layers of the world ocean, completely
 unexpectedly to climatologists, began to cool in 2003. The heat
 accumulated by them unfortunately now is running out. Over the past
 decade, global temperature on the Earth has not increased; global
 warming has ceased, and already there are signs of the future deep
 temperature drop. Meantime the concentration of carbon dioxide in the
 atmosphere over these years has grown by more than 4%, and in 2006
 many meteorologists predicted that 2007 would be the hottest of the
 last decade. This did not occur, although the global temperature of
 the Earth would have increased at least 0.1 degree if it depended on
 the concentration of carbon dioxide. It follows that warming had a
 natural origin, the contribution of CO2 to it was insignificant,
 anthropogenic increase in the concentration of carbon dioxide does
not
 serve as an explanation for it, and in the foreseeable future CO2
will
 not be able to cause catastrophic warming. The so-called greenhouse
 effect will not avert the onset of the next deep temperature drop,
the
 19th in the last 7500 years, which without fail follows after natural
 warming.
 The earth is no longer threatened by the catastrophic global warming
 forecast by some scientists; warming passed its peak in 1998-2005,
 while the value of the TSI by July - September of last year had
 already declined by 0.47 W/m2.
 For several years until the beginning in 2013 of a steady temperature
 drop, in a phase of instability, temperature will oscillate around
the
 maximum that has been reached, without further substantial rise.
 Changes in climatic conditions will occur unevenly, depending on
 latitude. A temperature decrease in the smallest degree would affect
 the equatorial regions and strongly influence the temperate climate
 zones. The changes will have very serious consequences, and it is
 necessary to begin preparations even now, since there is practically
 no time in reserve. The global temperature of the Earth has begun its
 decrease without limitations on the volume of greenhouse gas
emissions
 by industrially developed countries; therefore the implementation of
 the Kyoto protocol aimed to rescue the planet from the greenhouse
 effect should be put off at least 150 years.
 Consequently, we should fear a deep temperature drop—not catastrophic
 global warming. Humanity must survive the serious economic, social,
 demographic and political consequences of a global temperature drop,
 which will directly affect the national interests of almost all
 countries and more than 80% of the population of the Earth. A deep
 temperature drop is a considerably greater threat to humanity than
 warming. However, a reliable forecast of the time of the onset and of
 the depth of the global temperature drop will make it possible to
 adjust in advance the economic activity of humanity, to considerably
 weaken the crisis.
"His views [that Mars warming proves the earth warming is due to the
sun] are completely at odds with the mainstream scientific opinion,"
said Colin Wilson, a planetary physicist at England's Oxford
University.
[/quote]
•• Ho Ho ho! "Mainstream scientific opinion"
is more often wrong than right
[quote]
"And they contradict the extensive evidence presented in the most
recent IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change]
report." (Related: "Global Warming 'Very Likely' Caused by Humans,
World Climate Experts Say" [February 2, 2007].)
[/quote]
•• ROTFLMAO- IPCC #4 has been debunked
page by page. and 'Very Likely' is typically
uncertain. The World Climate Experts were
not polled.
[quote]Amato Evan, a climate scientist at the University of Wisconsin,
Madison, added that "the idea just isn't supported by the theory or by
the observations."
[/quote]
•• Bunkom- I've seen some of the work of UWMadison
not worth the effort.
[quote]Perhaps the biggest stumbling block in Abdussamatov's theory is his
dismissal of the greenhouse effect, in which atmospheric gases such as
carbon dioxide help keep heat trapped near the planet's surface.
[/quote]
•• That is the whole point, "atmospheric gases
such as carbon dioxide help keep heat trapped"
but they do not. Nobody has in anyway proved
that they do.
[quote]He claims that carbon dioxide has only a small influence on Earth's
climate and virtually no influence on Mars.
But "without the greenhouse effect there would be very little, if any,
life on Earth, since our planet would pretty much be a big ball of
ice," said Evan, of the University of Wisconsin.
[/quote]
•• ROTFLMAO — Standard IPCC nonsense.
CO2 is essential for all life on the planet. If
you don't like it, that is your problem. Read
Below.
H2O in the atmosphere is collected into clouds
along with CO2 and NO2 and when it rains it
distributes the two chemical fertilizers across
the earth.
Why Carbon Dioxide is Absolutely Essential
to Life on Earth
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Photosynthesis is the process by which plants
produce organic compounds and oxygen from
carbon dioxide and water.
Photosynthesis is a process that converts carbon
dioxide into organic compounds, especially
sugars, using the energy from sunlight.
Photosynthesis occurs in plants, algae, and many
species of bacteria. All use water and carbon
dioxide as initial substrates and release oxygen as
a waste product.
Carbon occupies a special place on the periodic
table of elements and has the unique ability to
form chains with other carbon atoms. Those
bonds give it the unique ability to store large
amounts of energy in its bonds, and to release that
energy, in a relatively stable, controllable way.
From these chains of carbon, plants form energy-
containing carbohydrates, such as sugar and oils,
and structural carbohydrates called cellulose,
which gives plants their rigidity and allows them
to grow tall without falling over. Heterotrophic
organisms, such as animals, depend on those
organic compounds. Therefore, photosynthesis
is crucially important for life on Earth. As well as
maintaining the normal level of oxygen in the
atmosphere, nearly all life either depends on it
directly as a source of energy, or indirectly as the
ultimate source of the energy in their food.
––  ––
 
 In real science the burden of proof is always

 on the proposer, never on the sceptics. So far
 
 neither IPCC nor anyone else has provided one
 
 iota of valid data for global warming nor have

 they provided data that climate change is being
 
 effected by commerce and industry, and not by
 natural phenomena. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| richp... |
| Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 10:43 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 4, 10:03 am, Last Post <last_p... at (no spam) primus.ca> wrote:
[quote]On Nov 3, 8:07 pm, richp <travelingman95... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Nov 3, 11:02 am, Last Post <last_p... at (no spam) primus.ca> wrote:
THE SUN DEFINES THE CLIMATE
by Habibullo Abdussamatov, Dr. Sc. -
Head of Space research laboratory of
the Pulkovo Observatory
October 27th 2009, 2:52 PM EDT
Co2sceptic (Site Admin)
article image
(translated from Russian by Lucy Hancockhttp://climaterealists.comindex.php?id=4254&linkbox=true
Key Excerpts: Observations of the Sun show that as for the increase in
emperature, carbon dioxide is “not guilty” and as for what lies ahead
n the upcoming decades, it is not catastrophic warming, but a global,
nd very prolonged, temperature drop. [...] Over the past decade,
lobal temperature on the Earth has not increased; global warming has
ceased, and already there are signs of the future deep temperature
drop. [...] It follows that warming had a natural origin, the
contribution of CO2 to it was insignificant, anthropogenic increase
in
the concentration of carbon dioxide does not serve as an explanation
for it, and in the foreseeable future CO2 will not be able to cause
catastrophic warming. The so-called greenhouse effect will not avert
the onset of the next deep temperature drop, the 19th in the last
7500
years, which without fail follows after natural warming. [...]
We should fear a deep temperature drop—not catastrophic global
warming. Humanity must survive the serious economic, social,
demographic and political consequences of a global temperature drop,
which will directly affect the national interests of almost all
countries and more than 80% of the population of the Earth. A deep
temperature drop is a considerably greater threat to humanity than
warming. However, a reliable forecast of the time of the onset and of
the depth of the global temperature drop will make it possible to
adjust in advance the economic activity of humanity, to considerably
weaken the crisis.
Experts of the United Nations in regular reports publish data said to
show that the Earth is approaching a catastrophic global warming,
caused by increasing emissions of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere..
However, observations of the Sun show that as for the increase in
temperature, carbon dioxide is “not guilty” and as for what lies
ahead
in the upcoming decades, it is not catastrophic warming, but a
global,
and very prolonged, temperature drop.
Life on earth completely depends on solar radiation, the ultimate
source of energy for natural processes. For a long time it was
thought
that the luminosity of the Sun never changes, and for this reason the
quantity of solar energy received per second over one square meter
above the atmosphere at the distance of the Earth from the Sun
(149,597,892 km), was named the solar constant.
Until 1978, precise measurements of the value of the total solar
irradiance (TSI) were not available. But according to indirect data,
namely the established major climate variations of the Earth in
recent
millennia, one must doubt the invariance of its value.
In the middle of the nineteenth century, German and Swiss astronomers
Heinrich Schwabe and Rudolf Wolf established that the number of spots
on the surface of the Sun periodically changes, diminishing from a
maximum to a minimum, and then growing again, over a time frame on
the
order of 11 years. Wolf introduced an index ("W") of the relative
number of sunspots, computed as the sum of 10 times number of sunspot
groups plus the total number of spots in all groups. This number has
been regularly measured since 1849. Drawing on the work of
professional astronomers and the observations of amateurs (which are
of uncertain reliability) Wolf worked out a reconstruction of monthly
values from 1749 as well as annual values from 1700. Today, the
reconstruction of this time series stretches back to 1611. It has an
eleven-year cycle of recurrence as well as other cycles related to
onset and development of individual sunspot groups: changes in the
fraction of the solar surface occupied by faculae, the frequency of
prominences, and other phenomena in the solar chromosphere and
corona.
Analyzing the long record of sunspot numbers, the English astronomer
Walter Maunder in 1893 came to the conclusion that from 1645 to 1715
sunspots had been generally absent. Over the thirty-year period of
the
Maunder Minimum, astronomers of the time counted only about 50 spots.
Usually, over that length of time, about 50,000 sunspots would
appear.
Today, it has been established that such minima have repeatedly
occurred in the past. It is also known that the Maunder Minimum
accompanied the coldest phase of a global temperature dip, physically
measured in Europe and other regions, the most severe such dip for
several millennia, which stretched from the fourteenth to the
nineteenth centuries (now known as the Little Ice Age).
The search for a relationship between large climate variations and
phenomena observed in the Sun led to an interest in finding a
connection between periods of change in the terrestrial climate and
corresponding significant changes in the level of observed solar
activity, because the sunspot number is the only index that has been
measured over a long period of time.
Determinative role of the Sun in variations in the climate of the
Earth
The Earth, after receiving and storing over the twentieth century an
anomalously large amount of heat energy, from the 1990’s began to
return it gradually. The upper layers of the world ocean, completely
unexpectedly to climatologists, began to cool in 2003. The heat
accumulated by them unfortunately now is running out. Over the past
decade, global temperature on the Earth has not increased; global
warming has ceased, and already there are signs of the future deep
temperature drop. Meantime the concentration of carbon dioxide in the
atmosphere over these years has grown by more than 4%, and in 2006
many meteorologists predicted that 2007 would be the hottest of the
last decade. This did not occur, although the global temperature of
the Earth would have increased at least 0.1 degree if it depended on
the concentration of carbon dioxide. It follows that warming had a
natural origin, the contribution of CO2 to it was insignificant,
anthropogenic increase in the concentration of carbon dioxide does
not
serve as an explanation for it, and in the foreseeable future CO2
will
not be able to cause catastrophic warming. The so-called greenhouse
effect will not avert the onset of the next deep temperature drop,
the
19th in the last 7500 years, which without fail follows after natural
warming.
The earth is no longer threatened by the catastrophic global warming
forecast by some scientists; warming passed its peak in 1998-2005,
while the value of the TSI by July - September of last year had
already declined by 0.47 W/m2.
For several years until the beginning in 2013 of a steady temperature
drop, in a phase of instability, temperature will oscillate around
the
maximum that has been reached, without further substantial rise.
Changes in climatic conditions will occur unevenly, depending on
latitude. A temperature decrease in the smallest degree would affect
the equatorial regions and strongly influence the temperate climate
zones. The changes will have very serious consequences, and it is
necessary to begin preparations even now, since there is practically
no time in reserve. The global temperature of the Earth has begun its
decrease without limitations on the volume of greenhouse gas
emissions
by industrially developed countries; therefore the implementation of
the Kyoto protocol aimed to rescue the planet from the greenhouse
effect should be put off at least 150 years.
Consequently, we should fear a deep temperature drop—not catastrophic
global warming. Humanity must survive the serious economic, social,
demographic and political consequences of a global temperature drop,
which will directly affect the national interests of almost all
countries and more than 80% of the population of the Earth. A deep
temperature drop is a considerably greater threat to humanity than
warming. However, a reliable forecast of the time of the onset and of
the depth of the global temperature drop will make it possible to
adjust in advance the economic activity of humanity, to considerably
weaken the crisis.
Hey moron a lot of things define climate you jackass
•• Those who would call others, "moron"
need only look in a mirror to see a real one.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
[/quote]
First your owm post defines you as a moron. Then I demonstrate that
fact to you and you call me one. You are one fucking arrogant bastard |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Last Post... |
| Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 3:23 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 4, 3:43 pm, richp <travelingman95... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Nov 4, 10:03 am, Last Post <last_p... at (no spam) primus.ca> wrote:
On Nov 3, 8:07 pm, richp <travelingman95... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Nov 3, 11:02 am, Last Post <last_p... at (no spam) primus.ca> wrote:
THE SUN DEFINES THE CLIMATE
by Habibullo Abdussamatov, Dr. Sc. -
Head of Space research laboratory of
the Pulkovo Observatory
October 27th 2009, 2:52 PM EDT
Co2sceptic (Site Admin)
article image
(translated from Russian by Lucy Hancockhttp://climaterealists.comindex.php?id=4254&linkbox=true
Key Excerpts: Observations of the Sun show that as for the increase in
emperature, carbon dioxide is “not guilty” and as for what lies ahead
n the upcoming decades, it is not catastrophic warming, but a global,
nd very prolonged, temperature drop. [...] Over the past decade,
lobal temperature on the Earth has not increased; global warming has
ceased, and already there are signs of the future deep temperature
drop. [...] It follows that warming had a natural origin, the
contribution of CO2 to it was insignificant, anthropogenic increase
in
the concentration of carbon dioxide does not serve as an explanation
for it, and in the foreseeable future CO2 will not be able to cause
catastrophic warming. The so-called greenhouse effect will not avert
the onset of the next deep temperature drop, the 19th in the last
7500
years, which without fail follows after natural warming. [...]
We should fear a deep temperature drop—not catastrophic global
warming. Humanity must survive the serious economic, social,
demographic and political consequences of a global temperature drop,
which will directly affect the national interests of almost all
countries and more than 80% of the population of the Earth. A deep
temperature drop is a considerably greater threat to humanity than
warming. However, a reliable forecast of the time of the onset and of
the depth of the global temperature drop will make it possible to
adjust in advance the economic activity of humanity, to considerably
weaken the crisis.
Experts of the United Nations in regular reports publish data said to
show that the Earth is approaching a catastrophic global warming,
caused by increasing emissions of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere.
However, observations of the Sun show that as for the increase in
temperature, carbon dioxide is “not guilty” and as for what lies
ahead
in the upcoming decades, it is not catastrophic warming, but a
global,
and very prolonged, temperature drop.
Life on earth completely depends on solar radiation, the ultimate
source of energy for natural processes. For a long time it was
thought
that the luminosity of the Sun never changes, and for this reason the
quantity of solar energy received per second over one square meter
above the atmosphere at the distance of the Earth from the Sun
(149,597,892 km), was named the solar constant.
Until 1978, precise measurements of the value of the total solar
irradiance (TSI) were not available. But according to indirect data,
namely the established major climate variations of the Earth in
recent
millennia, one must doubt the invariance of its value.
In the middle of the nineteenth century, German and Swiss astronomers
Heinrich Schwabe and Rudolf Wolf established that the number of spots
on the surface of the Sun periodically changes, diminishing from a
maximum to a minimum, and then growing again, over a time frame on
the
order of 11 years. Wolf introduced an index ("W") of the relative
number of sunspots, computed as the sum of 10 times number of sunspot
groups plus the total number of spots in all groups. This number has
been regularly measured since 1849. Drawing on the work of
professional astronomers and the observations of amateurs (which are
of uncertain reliability) Wolf worked out a reconstruction of monthly
values from 1749 as well as annual values from 1700. Today, the
reconstruction of this time series stretches back to 1611. It has an
eleven-year cycle of recurrence as well as other cycles related to
onset and development of individual sunspot groups: changes in the
fraction of the solar surface occupied by faculae, the frequency of
prominences, and other phenomena in the solar chromosphere and
corona.
Analyzing the long record of sunspot numbers, the English astronomer
Walter Maunder in 1893 came to the conclusion that from 1645 to 1715
sunspots had been generally absent. Over the thirty-year period of
the
Maunder Minimum, astronomers of the time counted only about 50 spots.
Usually, over that length of time, about 50,000 sunspots would
appear.
Today, it has been established that such minima have repeatedly
occurred in the past. It is also known that the Maunder Minimum
accompanied the coldest phase of a global temperature dip, physically
measured in Europe and other regions, the most severe such dip for
several millennia, which stretched from the fourteenth to the
nineteenth centuries (now known as the Little Ice Age).
The search for a relationship between large climate variations and
phenomena observed in the Sun led to an interest in finding a
connection between periods of change in the terrestrial climate and
corresponding significant changes in the level of observed solar
activity, because the sunspot number is the only index that has been
measured over a long period of time.
Determinative role of the Sun in variations in the climate of the
Earth
The Earth, after receiving and storing over the twentieth century an
anomalously large amount of heat energy, from the 1990’s began to
return it gradually. The upper layers of the world ocean, completely
unexpectedly to climatologists, began to cool in 2003. The heat
accumulated by them unfortunately now is running out. Over the past
decade, global temperature on the Earth has not increased; global
warming has ceased, and already there are signs of the future deep
temperature drop. Meantime the concentration of carbon dioxide in the
atmosphere over these years has grown by more than 4%, and in 2006
many meteorologists predicted that 2007 would be the hottest of the
last decade. This did not occur, although the global temperature of
the Earth would have increased at least 0.1 degree if it depended on
the concentration of carbon dioxide. It follows that warming had a
natural origin, the contribution of CO2 to it was insignificant,
anthropogenic increase in the concentration of carbon dioxide does
not
serve as an explanation for it, and in the foreseeable future CO2
will
not be able to cause catastrophic warming. The so-called greenhouse
effect will not avert the onset of the next deep temperature drop,
the
19th in the last 7500 years, which without fail follows after natural
warming.
The earth is no longer threatened by the catastrophic global warming
forecast by some scientists; warming passed its peak in 1998-2005,
while the value of the TSI by July - September of last year had
already declined by 0.47 W/m2.
For several years until the beginning in 2013 of a steady temperature
drop, in a phase of instability, temperature will oscillate around
the
maximum that has been reached, without further substantial rise.
Changes in climatic conditions will occur unevenly, depending on
latitude. A temperature decrease in the smallest degree would affect
the equatorial regions and strongly influence the temperate climate
zones. The changes will have very serious consequences, and it is
necessary to begin preparations even now, since there is practically
no time in reserve. The global temperature of the Earth has begun its
decrease without limitations on the volume of greenhouse gas
emissions
by industrially developed countries; therefore the implementation of
the Kyoto protocol aimed to rescue the planet from the greenhouse
effect should be put off at least 150 years.
Consequently, we should fear a deep temperature drop—not catastrophic
global warming. Humanity must survive the serious economic, social,
demographic and political consequences of a global temperature drop,
which will directly affect the national interests of almost all
countries and more than 80% of the population of the Earth. A deep
temperature drop is a considerably greater threat to humanity than
warming. However, a reliable forecast of the time of the onset and of
the depth of the global temperature drop will make it possible to
adjust in advance the economic activity of humanity, to considerably
weaken the crisis.
Hey moron a lot of things define climate you jackass
•• Those who would call others, "moron"
need only look in a mirror to see a real one.-
First your owm post defines you as a moron. Then I demonstrate that
fact to you and you call me one. You are one fucking arrogant bastard
[/quote]
•• Those who would call others, "moron"
need only look in a mirror to see a real one |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Roger Coppock... |
| Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 3:37 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 3, 11:02 am, Last Post <last_p... at (no spam) primus.ca> wrote:
[quote] THE SUN DEFINES THE CLIMATE
by Habibullo Abdussamatov, Dr. Sc. -
Head of Space research laboratory of
the Pulkovo Observatory
[/quote]
A search of scientific paper index services show
that while Abdussamatov has published papers
on solar physics, there are no listings under his
name for papers on terrestrial climate.
[ Denialist Pseudoscience skipped ]
The problem with claims for a solar cause of
global warming is that solar output, sunspots,
and cosmic rays, show no large correlation with
global mean surface temperature. All three of
these show no long term trend large enough to
explain the observed warming, only an 11-year
cycle. What century long trends there are are
decreases, in the wrong direction to explain
the warming of the Earth.
http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/Solar_Irradiance.txt
http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/Solrad.jpg
http://www.pmodwrc.ch/pmod.php?topic=tsi/composite/SolarConstant
http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/Climax.jpg
http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Changes_In_Solar_Brightness_Too_Weak_To_Explain_Global_Warming_999.html
http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn12234-suns-activity-rules-out-link-to-global-warming.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7327393.stm
http://www.mpg.de/english/illustrationsDocumentation/documentation/pressReleases/2004/pressRelease20040802/
http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2007/07/no-link-between.html
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=42
To cause the current warming, an increase of about
3 Watts per square meter over the last century
is needed. The Sun has not made that increase
recently, period, end of story.
Also, over the last century:
--- Nighttime warming was greater than daytime warming.
--- Winter warming was greater than Summer warming.
--- Land warming was greater than sea warming.
--- High latitude warming is greater than equatorial warming.
--- The troposphere warmed, while the stratosphere cooled.
These patterns are totally inconsistent with a solar cause of
the observed warming over the same period. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Last Post... |
| Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 3:46 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 4, 8:37 pm, Roger Coppock <rcopp... at (no spam) adnc.com> wrote:
[quote]On Nov 3, 11:02 am, Last Post <last_p... at (no spam) primus.ca> wrote:
THE SUN DEFINES THE CLIMATE
by Habibullo Abdussamatov, Dr. Sc. -
Head of Space research laboratory of
the Pulkovo Observatory
A search of scientific paper index services show
that while Abdussamatov has published papers
on solar physics, there are no listings under his
name for papers on terrestrial climate.
[ Denialist Pseudoscience skipped ]
The problem with claims for a solar cause of
global warming is that solar output, sunspots,
and cosmic rays, show no large correlation with
global mean surface temperature. All three of
these show no long term trend large enough to
explain the observed warming, only an 11-year
cycle. What century long trends there are are
decreases, in the wrong direction to explain
the warming of the Earth.
•• AGW alarmist crap snpped
To cause the current warming, an increase of about
3 Watts per square meter over the last century
is needed. The Sun has not made that increase
recently, period, end of story.
Also, over the last century:
--- Nighttime warming was greater than daytime warming.
--- Winter warming was greater than Summer warming.
--- Land warming was greater than sea warming.
--- High latitude warming is greater than equatorial warming.
--- The troposphere warmed, while the stratosphere cooled.
These patterns are totally inconsistent with a solar cause of
the observed warming over the same period.
[/quote]
•• ROTFLMAO— Nobody gives your crap
(except AGW alarmist fools) any credibility
because all of it is not consistent with reality.
Grow up and wise up, you will live longer. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| I M at (no spam) good guy... |
| Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 7:53 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 17:37:06 -0800 (PST), Roger Coppock
<rcoppock at (no spam) adnc.com> wrote:
[quote]On Nov 3, 11:02Â am, Last Post <last_p... at (no spam) primus.ca> wrote:
 THE SUN DEFINES THE CLIMATE
  by Habibullo Abdussamatov, Dr. Sc. -
  Head of Space research laboratory of
 the Pulkovo Observatory
A search of scientific paper index services show
that while Abdussamatov has published papers
on solar physics, there are no listings under his
name for papers on terrestrial climate.
[ Denialist Pseudoscience skipped ]
The problem with claims for a solar cause of
global warming is that solar output, sunspots,
and cosmic rays, show no large correlation with
global mean surface temperature. All three of
these show no long term trend large enough to
explain the observed warming, only an 11-year
cycle. What century long trends there are are
decreases, in the wrong direction to explain
the warming of the Earth.
http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/Solar_Irradiance.txt
http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/Solrad.jpg
http://www.pmodwrc.ch/pmod.php?topic=tsi/composite/SolarConstant
http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/Climax.jpg
http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Changes_In_Solar_Brightness_Too_Weak_To_Explain_Global_Warming_999.html
http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn12234-suns-activity-rules-out-link-to-global-warming.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7327393.stm
http://www.mpg.de/english/illustrationsDocumentation/documentation/pressReleases/2004/pressRelease20040802/
http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2007/07/no-link-between.html
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=42
To cause the current warming, an increase of about
3 Watts per square meter over the last century
is needed. The Sun has not made that increase
recently, period, end of story.
Also, over the last century:
--- Nighttime warming was greater than daytime warming.
[/quote]
Or rather, it didn't get as hot, and it didn't get as cold.
Cities and airports got bigger and bigger.
[quote]--- Winter warming was greater than Summer warming.
[/quote]
Rather, it didn't get as cold, and it didn't get as hot.
More LWIR to space with higher temperatures.
Less LWIR to space when cooler.
[quote]--- Land warming was greater than sea warming.
[/quote]
Less snow cover since the Little Ice Age ended.
[quote]--- High latitude warming is greater than equatorial warming.
[/quote]
The Gulf Stream.
[quote]--- The troposphere warmed, while the stratosphere cooled.
[/quote]
More atmospheric mass, more GHG to cool stratosphere.
[quote]These patterns are totally inconsistent with a solar cause of
the observed warming over the same period.
[/quote]
The nearness to the sun results in not only
higher flux per unit of area, but also a radiating
area that subtends more of the celestial sphere.
The sun warms the Earth and atmosphere.
GHGs cool the atmosphere, Fourier said so. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Last Post... |
| Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 3:42 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 4, 7:53 pm, "I M at (no spam) good guy" <I... at (no spam) good.guy> wrote:
[quote]On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 17:37:06 -0800 (PST), Roger Coppock
rcopp... at (no spam) adnc.com> wrote:
On Nov 3, 11:02 am, Last Post <last_p... at (no spam) primus.ca> wrote:
THE SUN DEFINES THE CLIMATE
by Habibullo Abdussamatov, Dr. Sc. -
Head of Space research laboratory of
the Pulkovo Observatory
A search of scientific paper index services show
that while Abdussamatov has published papers
on solar physics, there are no listings under his
name for papers on terrestrial climate.
[ Denialist Pseudoscience skipped ]
The problem with claims for a solar cause of
global warming is that solar output, sunspots,
and cosmic rays, show no large correlation with
global mean surface temperature. All three of
these show no long term trend large enough to
explain the observed warming, only an 11-year
cycle. What century long trends there are are
decreases, in the wrong direction to explain
the warming of the Earth.
http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/Solar_Irradiance.txt
http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/Solrad.jpg
http://www.pmodwrc.ch/pmod.php?topic=tsi/composite/SolarConstant
http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/Climax.jpg
http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Changes_In_Solar_Brightness_Too_Wea...
http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn12234-suns-activity-rul...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7327393.stm
http://www.mpg.de/english/illustrationsDocumentation/documentation/pr...
http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2007/07/no-link-between.html
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=42
To cause the current warming, an increase of about
3 Watts per square meter over the last century
is needed. The Sun has not made that increase
recently, period, end of story.
Also, over the last century:
--- Nighttime warming was greater than daytime warming.
Or rather, it didn't get as hot, and it didn't get as cold.
Cities and airports got bigger and bigger.
--- Winter warming was greater than Summer warming.
Rather, it didn't get as cold, and it didn't get as hot.
More LWIR to space with higher temperatures.
Less LWIR to space when cooler.
--- Land warming was greater than sea warming.
Less snow cover since the Little Ice Age ended.
--- High latitude warming is greater than equatorial warming.
The Gulf Stream.
--- The troposphere warmed, while the stratosphere cooled.
More atmospheric mass, more GHG to cool stratosphere.
These patterns are totally inconsistent with a solar cause of
the observed warming over the same period.
The nearness to the sun results in not only
higher flux per unit of area, but also a radiating
area that subtends more of the celestial sphere.
The sun warms the Earth and atmosphere.
GHGs cool the atmosphere, Fourier said so.[/quote] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| leonard78sp at (no spam) gmail.com... |
| Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 10:36 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 5, 1:35 pm, "I M at (no spam) good guy" <I... at (no spam) good.guy> wrote:
[quote]On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 05:42:47 -0800 (PST), Last Post <last_p... at (no spam) primus.ca
wrote:
On Nov 4, 7:53 pm, "I M at (no spam) good guy" <I... at (no spam) good.guy> wrote:
On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 17:37:06 -0800 (PST), Roger Coppock
rcopp... at (no spam) adnc.com> wrote:
On Nov 3, 11:02 am, Last Post <last_p... at (no spam) primus.ca> wrote:
THE SUN DEFINES THE CLIMATE
by Habibullo Abdussamatov, Dr. Sc. -
Head of Space research laboratory of
the Pulkovo Observatory
A search of scientific paper index services show
that while Abdussamatov has published papers
on solar physics, there are no listings under his
name for papers on terrestrial climate.
[ Denialist Pseudoscience skipped ]
The problem with claims for a solar cause of
global warming is that solar output, sunspots,
and cosmic rays, show no large correlation with
global mean surface temperature. All three of
these show no long term trend large enough to
explain the observed warming, only an 11-year
cycle. What century long trends there are are
decreases, in the wrong direction to explain
the warming of the Earth.
http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/Solar_Irradiance.txt
http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/Solrad.jpg
http://www.pmodwrc.ch/pmod.php?topic=tsi/composite/SolarConstant
http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/Climax.jpg
http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Changes_In_Solar_Brightness_Too_Wea....
http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn12234-suns-activity-rul....
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7327393.stm
http://www.mpg.de/english/illustrationsDocumentation/documentation/pr....
http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2007/07/no-link-between.html
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=42
To cause the current warming, an increase of about
3 Watts per square meter over the last century
is needed. The Sun has not made that increase
recently, period, end of story.
Also, over the last century:
--- Nighttime warming was greater than daytime warming.
Or rather, it didn't get as hot, and it didn't get as cold.
Cities and airports got bigger and bigger.
--- Winter warming was greater than Summer warming.
Rather, it didn't get as cold, and it didn't get as hot.
More LWIR to space with higher temperatures.
Less LWIR to space when cooler.
--- Land warming was greater than sea warming.
Less snow cover since the Little Ice Age ended.
--- High latitude warming is greater than equatorial warming.
The Gulf Stream.
--- The troposphere warmed, while the stratosphere cooled.
More atmospheric mass, more GHG to cool stratosphere.
These patterns are totally inconsistent with a solar cause of
the observed warming over the same period.
The nearness to the sun results in not only
higher flux per unit of area, but also a radiating
area that subtends more of the celestial sphere.
The sun warms the Earth and atmosphere.
GHGs cool the atmosphere, Fourier said so.
What's with the post with no new text, is
that an indication you liked my response so much
you want everybody to read it again? 
[/quote]
•• Finger slipped on the wrong button <G> |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Wed Nov 25, 2009 4:56 pm
|
|