Sun explodes in activity!!!

[Old Rocks]

Hmmm...... Not reveling, just pointing out that in 1859 we had a major solar flare. Same thing could easily occur again. And would have some real negative results. Electro-magnetic fields strong enough to heat telegraph wires to the point that they caused numerous fires wouldn't do our grids or satellites any good.

 

[Old Rocks]

Pointing out that there are natural and manmade disasters that one should prepare for is something that all too many here regard as anti-american.

I like the way this article ends. This fellow knows some of our nutcases.

Nasa's 2013 solar flare warning: how much do we need to worry? – Telegraph Blogs

 

[dilloduck]

Invest in sun screen. I'm going to open a cottage industry. I'll hire a lot of people and we'll all be rich when we're hot.

 

[FactFinder]

Pointing out that there are natural and manmade disasters that one should prepare for is something that all too many here regard as anti-american.

I like the way this article ends. This fellow knows some of our nutcases.

Nasa's 2013 solar flare warning: how much do we need to worry? – Telegraph Blogs

Y'all been crying wolf for some years now. Have you yet not got the clue that your hyperbole has the opposite effect of what you desire?

 

[Liability]

Pointing out that there are natural and manmade disasters that one should prepare for is something that all too many here regard as anti-american.

I like the way this article ends. This fellow knows some of our nutcases.

Nasa's 2013 solar flare warning: how much do we need to worry? – Telegraph Blogs

Y'all been crying wolf for some years now. Have you yet not got the clue that your hyperbole has the opposite effect of what you desire?

That's not fair. The sky really IS falling ...

 

[code1211]

if people believe the climate is going to gradually change because of CO2 they may be wrong !! we need to take a closer look at drastic climate change that could happen in a very short period of time caused by the sun !!............OH THATS RIGHT LIBBS BELIEVE IT's ALL MAN MADE !!

WRONG..., AGAIN!!! That's the "Big Lie" of the denier side, that the proponents ONLY consider GHGs. Nothing could be further from the truth. Why do you think the computer models are so complicated? Sort of trashes your argument, doesn't it?

What is the break down of the causes of AGW by the impact on the climate stated as a percent? What are all of the stated causes of AGW or warming in general and what percent is controllable by mankind.

That might be a good place to start the discussion of AGW.

 

[dilloduck]

Pointing out that there are natural and manmade disasters that one should prepare for is something that all too many here regard as anti-american.

I like the way this article ends. This fellow knows some of our nutcases.

Nasa's 2013 solar flare warning: how much do we need to worry? – Telegraph Blogs

Y'all been crying wolf for some years now. Have you yet not got the clue that your hyperbole has the opposite effect of what you desire?

That's not fair. The sky really IS falling ...

I'm selling some really thrifty and nifty " SKY IS FALLING " umbrellas. Look me up. They will prepare you for the impending catasrophes.

 

[code1211]

Hmmm....... Very active sun, with strong El Nino somtime in the next two years, gonna be a hot time in the old towm tonight.

GHGs increasing faster than predicted, if the other factors all go positive, the effect are going to be dramatic.

The CO2 part of the factors has been positive with no impact. Go figure.

So it's the OTHER factors that we need to be concerned with? Can mankind control them, too?

 

[Liability]

Y'all been crying wolf for some years now. Have you yet not got the clue that your hyperbole has the opposite effect of what you desire?

That's not fair. The sky really IS falling ...

I'm selling some really thrifty and nifty " SKY IS FALLING " umbrellas. Look me up. They will prepare you for the impending catasrophes.

Best to be safe....

 

[ScienceRocks]

if people believe the climate is going to gradually change because of CO2 they may be wrong !! we need to take a closer look at drastic climate change that could happen in a very short period of time caused by the sun !!............OH THATS RIGHT LIBBS BELIEVE IT's ALL MAN MADE !!

WRONG..., AGAIN!!! That's the "Big Lie" of the denier side, that the proponents ONLY consider GHGs. Nothing could be further from the truth. Why do you think the computer models are so complicated? Sort of trashes your argument, doesn't it?

What is the break down of the causes of AGW by the impact on the climate stated as a percent? What are all of the stated causes of AGW or warming in general and what percent is controllable by mankind.

That might be a good place to start the discussion of AGW.

Up until the 1950's I'd say
http://www.skepticalscience.com/pics/Solar_vs_Temp_basic.gif

We can confirm this by comparing the calculation to empirical observations. From 1900 to 1950 the Earth's surface temperature warmed by about 0.4°C. Over that period, humans increased the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere by about 20 parts per million by volume. This corresponds to an anthropogenic warming of:

dT = λ*dF = 5.35*(0.54 to 1.2°C/[W-m-2]*ln(310/295) = 0.14 to 0.32°C with a most likely value of 0.22°C

Therefore, the solar forcing combined with the anthropogenic CO2 forcing and other minor forcings (such as decreased volcanic activity) can account for the 0.4°C warming in the early 20th century, with the solar forcing accounting for about 40% of the total warming. Over the past century, this increase in TSI is responsible for about 15-20% of global warming (Meehl 2004). But since TSI hasn't increased in at least the past 32 years (and more like 60 years, based on reconstructions), the Sun is not directly responsible for the warming over that period.

Solar activity & climate: is the sun causing global warming?

So since 1950...I'd say more like 100 percent of the warming caused by 2.7 watt/meter^2 green house gas forcing with 1.77 watts/meter^2 in 2009 being from co2. Hell looking at the first graph above...It is very hard NOT to say that the sun isn't a negative forcing on the climate system since 1950. I strongly believe since 2004 it has been!!!

Cosmic rays?

http://www.skepticalscience.com/pics/NeutronMonitor.GIF

Haven't really changed...

Knowing damn well that the sun is likely a negative forcing....With the other factors such as increase in asian aerosols. Of course this is IF wirebender is WRONG...A lot of what he brings to the table does make sense, but if he is right that is like back to square one in finding this forcing. 100 years of science and understanding of the climate thrown straight down the crappier. Maybe he is right, but that would be a cluster **** on levels that reach around the earth 20 times over again. If he is he deserves the Nobel prize!

 

[whitehall]

To paraphrase the Clinton Gore ticket, "it's the Sun stupid". It has always been the Sun and it will always be the Sun. Ice core samples show radical changes in the Earth's temperature in the last several thousand years. There are marks on boulders in NYC's Central Park that show a glacier that dragged a ton of stuff and gouged the Hudson River. How did it happen before humans and fire? It ain't about the piddling carbon footprint of a hundred years of the industrial age. It's the Sun stupid.

 

[percysunshine]

The end game is that the sun supernovas due to gravitational collapse.

Have a nice day.

 

[ScienceRocks]

To paraphrase the Clinton Gore ticket, "it's the Sun stupid". It has always been the Sun and it will always be the Sun. Ice core samples show radical changes in the Earth's temperature in the last several thousand years. There are marks on boulders in NYC's Central Park that show a glacier that dragged a ton of stuff and gouged the Hudson River. How did it happen before humans and fire? It ain't about the piddling carbon footprint of a hundred years of the industrial age. It's the Sun stupid.

The sun surely could explain it until 1950. Not today. The sun and the orbit of the earth caused the earth entering and exiting the ice age...Do you see a positive forcing for that now? We have a negative forcing as we're moving out of this interglacial period for Christ sakes.

 

[Liability]

The end game is that the sun supernovas due to gravitational collapse.

Have a nice day.

But what's the over under on that happening before all the AGW warming causes all the polar ice and glaciers to melt and cause a global flood?

******* SUV's.

 

[ScienceRocks]

The end game is that the sun supernovas due to gravitational collapse.

Have a nice day.

But what's the over under on that happening before all the AGW warming causes all the polar ice and glaciers to melt and cause a global flood?

******* SUV's.

The planet COULD warm 4c by 2100. Lets see how much more food humanity will have and how much better the planet will be to support human life when it does. You people say you went it to happen...I'd say you might get it too. Look at the good side of it
1# Warmer winters,
2# Drilling for oil in the arctic
3# farming in northern Canada and Russia



Either way you people deserve it!

 

[Old Rocks]

Hmmm....... Very active sun, with strong El Nino somtime in the next two years, gonna be a hot time in the old towm tonight.

GHGs increasing faster than predicted, if the other factors all go positive, the effect are going to be dramatic.

The CO2 part of the factors has been positive with no impact. Go figure.

So it's the OTHER factors that we need to be concerned with? Can mankind control them, too?

Flat out lie, Code. From the glaciers to the continental ice caps, to an increasing warm and acidic ocean, the impacts are clear. The scientists are measuring them daily. And people like you are lying about them on a daily basis.

 

[Old Rocks]

To paraphrase the Clinton Gore ticket, "it's the Sun stupid". It has always been the Sun and it will always be the Sun. Ice core samples show radical changes in the Earth's temperature in the last several thousand years. There are marks on boulders in NYC's Central Park that show a glacier that dragged a ton of stuff and gouged the Hudson River. How did it happen before humans and fire? It ain't about the piddling carbon footprint of a hundred years of the industrial age. It's the Sun stupid.

It's the stupidity, you stupid ass.

We damned well know what drives the ice ages. And we should be slowly sliding into the next one over a few thousand years. Instead, we are rapidly warming.

You idiotic flap yap about glacial straitions is simply a diversion to prevent people from realizing the present effects of a rapidly warming climate.

 

[Liability]

The end game is that the sun supernovas due to gravitational collapse.

Have a nice day.

But what's the over under on that happening before all the AGW warming causes all the polar ice and glaciers to melt and cause a global flood?

******* SUV's.

The planet COULD warm 4c by 2100. Lets see how much more food humanity will have and how much better the planet will be to support human life when it does. You people say you went it to happen...I'd say you might get it too. Look at the good side of it
1# Warmer winters,
2# Drilling for oil in the arctic
3# farming in northern Canada and Russia



Either way you people deserve it!

And the planet could cool, too.

Instead of your meaningless rhetoric, get busy trying to (at long last) prove that there is ANY correlation between human produced CO2 and "global warming." Then prove that natural sources for any global warming aren't far outpacing any marginal increase which might be attributable to humans.

So far, you guys have sucked ass at that "minor" set of considerations.

 

[Old Rocks]

The end game is that the sun supernovas due to gravitational collapse.

Have a nice day.

But what's the over under on that happening before all the AGW warming causes all the polar ice and glaciers to melt and cause a global flood?

******* SUV's.

The planet COULD warm 4c by 2100. Lets see how much more food humanity will have and how much better the planet will be to support human life when it does. You people say you went it to happen...I'd say you might get it too. Look at the good side of it
1# Warmer winters,
2# Drilling for oil in the arctic
3# farming in northern Canada and Russia



Either way you people deserve it!

The present climate of Texas in Nebraska.

Actually, we really don't know what the effects of a 4 degree rise in temperature would have in the space of a few decades. About the best prediction we can make is for wider and wilder swings in weather, with an overall warming trend.

 

[Old Rocks]

But what's the over under on that happening before all the AGW warming causes all the polar ice and glaciers to melt and cause a global flood?

******* SUV's.

The planet COULD warm 4c by 2100. Lets see how much more food humanity will have and how much better the planet will be to support human life when it does. You people say you went it to happen...I'd say you might get it too. Look at the good side of it
1# Warmer winters,
2# Drilling for oil in the arctic
3# farming in northern Canada and Russia



Either way you people deserve it!

And the planet could cool, too.

Instead of your meaningless rhetoric, get busy trying to (at long last) prove that there is ANY correlation between human produced CO2 and "global warming." Then prove that natural sources for any global warming aren't far outpacing any marginal increase which might be attributable to humans.

So far, you guys have sucked ass at that "minor" set of considerations.

Been proven since 1858.

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect