Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Yet you refer to a scientist that claims that energy from the sun moves the Ether hence when the Ether moves because of the sun, the co2 in the ether must move or vibrate.Somebody inform Billy that those magnetic waves are on the sun, and they don't reach out to the earth.
But then, maybe the magnetic waves are what move the excited solar molecules. Billy really should publish his Grand Unified Theory of Kookery.
Omg! Dude/dudette you really do post some of the silliest stuff.this is just more evidence that you have no idea what you're even saying!Somebody inform Billy that those magnetic waves are on the sun, and they don't reach out to the earth.
But then, maybe the magnetic waves are what move the excited solar molecules. Billy really should publish his Grand Unified Theory of Kookery.
I wonder if he's/she's ever heard of the aurora borealis?Yet you refer to a scientist that claims that energy from the sun moves the Ether hence when the Ether moves because of the sun, the co2 in the ether must move or vibrate.Somebody inform Billy that those magnetic waves are on the sun, and they don't reach out to the earth.
But then, maybe the magnetic waves are what move the excited solar molecules. Billy really should publish his Grand Unified Theory of Kookery.
So explain your kookery, or better yet, link to that grand theory of co2 you accept as science, that was tyndall, right.
Either way, another moot post, from maMOOT
The fact my old 69' Chevy gets 30 miles to the gallon. You are a Mllennial. We folks who have actually had life experience forgive you.
Really?
From Wikipedia:
Total solar irradiance
The total solar irradiance (TSI) is the amount of solar radiative energy incident on the Earth's upper atmosphere. TSI variations were undetectable until satellite observations began in late 1978. A series of radiometers carried on satellites from the 1970s to the 2000s.[13]TSI differed from 1360 to 1370 W/m2 across ten satellites. The controversial 1989-1991 “ACRIM gap” between non-overlapping satellites has been interpolated by an ACRIM composite showing +0.037%/decade rise by the ACRIM group, and a PMOD composite with a -0.008%/decade downward trend by the PMOD group.[14] This 0.045%/decade difference strongly impacts climate models.
Satellite measurements show that solar irradiance varies systematically over the 11-year sunspot cycle,[15] both in total irradiance and in the relative components of the irradiance (UV Light ratios to Visible Light Ratios). The solar luminosity is about 0.07 percent brighter during solar maximum than during solar minimum. Photospheric magnetism appears to be the primary cause (96%) of 1996-2013 TSI variation.[16] Observations from spacecraft in the 2000s showed that the ratio of ultraviolet to visible light is much more variable than previously thought.[17]
*************************************************************************************
Oddly, there is no Wikipedia entry for "total solar output". They do have one for "solar luminosity" which term appears on the quote above. It's article defines the term "The solar luminosity, L☉, is a unit of radiant flux (power emitted in the form ofphotons) conventionally used by astronomers to measure the luminosity of stars. One solar luminosity is equal to the current accepted luminosity of the Sun, which is 3.846×1026 W, or 3.846×1033 erg/s.[2] This does not include the solar neutrino luminosity, which would add 0.023 L☉.[3]
Obviously, this is no different than TSI unless you want to suggest global warming is being caused by alterations in the sun's neutrino flux.
After having gone through several other Wikipedia articles and a number of Google search results, I can find NO solar parameter termed "total solar output". I find the phrase used on a few occasions, but in each case it was simply the author's substitution for TSI.
Let's see how you think TSI and "total solar output" differ, Billy boy.
Then, you can show us the correlation with Earth's global temperatures; any set you care to use. Mind you, though, we'll judge you by the tools you choose.
TSI does not include the magnetic waves, which go unseen and unrecorded for the most part
Unexpectedly powerfulmagnetic waves could help explain the super-hot nature of the sun's outer shell, researchers say.
The sun's outermost layer, or corona, can reach temperatures as high as 3.5 million degrees Fahrenheit (2 million degrees Celsius), more than 20 times hotter than its surface, and blast out a wind of electrically charged particles traveling at hundreds of miles per second. All this activity requires energy, but what provides the energy has been a mystery.
Magnetic waves known as Alfvén waves from the cool lower solar atmosphere had long been proposed as the source, but there had been scant evidence that such waves were powerful and abundant enough to power
It remains uncertain how the magnetic waves on the sun transfer their energy to the matter in the corona to heat or accelerate it. In addition, the waves the researchers observed did not appear sufficient to account
There is much we still do not know about our sun and what drives many things.. those waves also affect the earth and are not accounted for in TSI.
Source
Using wiki as a source is laughable...
Somebody inform Billy that those magnetic waves are on the sun, and they don't reach out to the earth.
But then, maybe the magnetic waves are what move the excited solar molecules. Billy really should publish his Grand Unified Theory of Kookery.
Really?
From Wikipedia:
Total solar irradiance
The total solar irradiance (TSI) is the amount of solar radiative energy incident on the Earth's upper atmosphere. TSI variations were undetectable until satellite observations began in late 1978. A series of radiometers carried on satellites from the 1970s to the 2000s.[13]TSI differed from 1360 to 1370 W/m2 across ten satellites. The controversial 1989-1991 “ACRIM gap” between non-overlapping satellites has been interpolated by an ACRIM composite showing +0.037%/decade rise by the ACRIM group, and a PMOD composite with a -0.008%/decade downward trend by the PMOD group.[14] This 0.045%/decade difference strongly impacts climate models.
Satellite measurements show that solar irradiance varies systematically over the 11-year sunspot cycle,[15] both in total irradiance and in the relative components of the irradiance (UV Light ratios to Visible Light Ratios). The solar luminosity is about 0.07 percent brighter during solar maximum than during solar minimum. Photospheric magnetism appears to be the primary cause (96%) of 1996-2013 TSI variation.[16] Observations from spacecraft in the 2000s showed that the ratio of ultraviolet to visible light is much more variable than previously thought.[17]
*************************************************************************************
Oddly, there is no Wikipedia entry for "total solar output". They do have one for "solar luminosity" which term appears on the quote above. It's article defines the term "The solar luminosity, L☉, is a unit of radiant flux (power emitted in the form ofphotons) conventionally used by astronomers to measure the luminosity of stars. One solar luminosity is equal to the current accepted luminosity of the Sun, which is 3.846×1026 W, or 3.846×1033 erg/s.[2] This does not include the solar neutrino luminosity, which would add 0.023 L☉.[3]
Obviously, this is no different than TSI unless you want to suggest global warming is being caused by alterations in the sun's neutrino flux.
After having gone through several other Wikipedia articles and a number of Google search results, I can find NO solar parameter termed "total solar output". I find the phrase used on a few occasions, but in each case it was simply the author's substitution for TSI.
Let's see how you think TSI and "total solar output" differ, Billy boy.
Then, you can show us the correlation with Earth's global temperatures; any set you care to use. Mind you, though, we'll judge you by the tools you choose.
TSI does not include the magnetic waves, which go unseen and unrecorded for the most part
Unexpectedly powerful
The sun's outermost layer, or corona, can reach temperatures as high as 3.5 million degrees Fahrenheit (2 million degrees Celsius), more than 20 times hotter than its surface, and blast out a wind of electrically charged particles traveling at hundreds of miles per second. All this activity requires energy, but what provides the energy has been a mystery.
Magnetic waves known as Alfvén waves from the cool lower solar atmosphere had long been proposed as the source, but there had been scant evidence that such waves were powerful and abundant enough to power
It remains uncertain how the magnetic waves on the sun transfer their energy to the matter in the corona to heat or accelerate it. In addition, the waves the researchers observed did not appear sufficient to account
There is much we still do not know about our sun and what drives many things.. those waves also affect the earth and are not accounted for in TSI.
Source
Using wiki as a source is laughable...
Criticizing Wiki as a source is laughable.
Where is the mechanism by which the sun's magnetic fields heat the Earth? And where is the correlation between solar gauss and global temperatures? Where is the data with which you think to overthrow the work of ten thousand scientists in ten thousand studies?
Again, I don't think he/she has heard of the Aurora borealisSomebody inform Billy that those magnetic waves are on the sun, and they don't reach out to the earth.
But then, maybe the magnetic waves are what move the excited solar molecules. Billy really should publish his Grand Unified Theory of Kookery.
Your a fool...
Tell me moron, if I throw a rock into a pond does it create a wave? Will that wave ultimately reach all the way around the pond?
When the sun throws off magnetic pulses it does indeed create a wave and it does indeed hit the earth. If it did not then why do we measure solar wind and pulses in our atmosphere?
Your stupidity and ignorance is astounding.
Lordy, lordy, dumb fucks will be dumb fucks.
How does the aurora borealis the Northern Lights work - HowStuffWorks
The aurora borealis (the Northern Lights) and the aurora australis (the Southern Lights) have always fascinated mankind, and people even travel thousands of miles just to see the brilliant light shows in the earth's atmosphere. The auroras, both surrounding the north magnetic pole (aurora borealis) and south magnetic pole (aurora australis) occur when highly charged electrons from the solar wind interact with elements in the earth's atmosphere. Solar winds stream away from the sun at speeds of about 1 million miles per hour. When they reach the earth, some 40 hours after leaving the sun, they follow the lines of magnetic force generated by the earth's core and flow through the magnetosphere, a teardrop-shaped area of highly charged electrical and magnetic fields.
While the sun's magnetic fields create these charged particles, it is the Earth's magnetic field that guide them to the polar regions and create the Aurora there.
The problem isn't that solar power is the driver, it's that CO2 has a forcing factor. Also,
Sun climate moving in opposite directions
There is no correlation or forcing factor... None... In fact there is a dampening effect as compared to the LOG of CO2 in the lab. The increase we should see from CO2 alone is cut down by 80%. The last 100 years shows that natural variation is the only thing attributable to any rise in temperature.
yes, we have to ask ourselves why the mileage really hasn't come up since the 70s. ..hmmm let me see... cause oil barrens/kings and all their cronies in power of government industry don't want to take a hit to their sales.Which has to do with what? How does that relate to solar output? Or are you just attempting to prove that you are a silly troll?The fact my old 69' Chevy gets 30 miles to the gallon. You are a Mllennial. We folks who have actually had life experience forgive you.
You are the troll. It relates to Crick's question.
Yes the whole mileage scam is a fact. The point is how the Leftyoon whackos think they can control nature.yes we have the MOST cars getting the same 30 miles or less a gallon they did decades ago. you are a fool selling the planet's limited natural resources so a few can be billionaires at all our expenses. a curse upon you and all your kin is what you've done. your a moron and morons go extinct thank God.US cars and trucks are the cleanest in the world as are our Coal Fired Electrical Generation plants... The problems are not here in the US but overseas, yet for some reason you communist slugs want to destroy our country and economy...again, what about all the poison in the gas? who cares? go see if the chinese are starting to care. go live there cause we all soon will be there if we don't run from fossil fuel we will all be fossils
Mileage scam? What have I missed?
The fact my old 69' Chevy gets 30 miles to the gallon. You are a Mllennial. We folks who have actually had life experience forgive you.
Are you speaking to me? If so, you're about 50 years off.
If that is the case then you know average mileage has not really changed. So why are you asking?
Snooks hey how about this one, here it is they actually don't know how the climate works. Holy funny crapLordy, lordy, dumb fucks will be dumb fucks.
How does the aurora borealis the Northern Lights work - HowStuffWorks
The aurora borealis (the Northern Lights) and the aurora australis (the Southern Lights) have always fascinated mankind, and people even travel thousands of miles just to see the brilliant light shows in the earth's atmosphere. The auroras, both surrounding the north magnetic pole (aurora borealis) and south magnetic pole (aurora australis) occur when highly charged electrons from the solar wind interact with elements in the earth's atmosphere. Solar winds stream away from the sun at speeds of about 1 million miles per hour. When they reach the earth, some 40 hours after leaving the sun, they follow the lines of magnetic force generated by the earth's core and flow through the magnetosphere, a teardrop-shaped area of highly charged electrical and magnetic fields.
While the sun's magnetic fields create these charged particles, it is the Earth's magnetic field that guide them to the polar regions and create the Aurora there.
And where do you suppose these highly charged electrons come from? The suns Corona and thermal layers.. MAGNETIC PULSES from the sun... Your really having a hard time with this aren't you..
The problem isn't that solar power is the driver, it's that CO2 has a forcing factor. Also,
Sun climate moving in opposite directions
There is no correlation or forcing factor... None... In fact there is a dampening effect as compared to the LOG of CO2 in the lab. The increase we should see from CO2 alone is cut down by 80%. The last 100 years shows that natural variation is the only thing attributable to any rise in temperature.
There is a correlation. See the NAS final report for details.
There may be a forcing factor. See the same report for details.
