The Solar Minimum

[Chris]

Ever since Samuel Heinrich Schwabe, a German astronomer, first noted in 1843 that sunspots burgeon and wane over a roughly 11-year cycle, scientists have carefully watched the Sun’s activity. In the latest lull, the Sun should have reached its calmest, least pockmarked state last fall.

Indeed, last year marked the blankest year of the Sun in the last half-century — 266 days with not a single sunspot visible from Earth. Then, in the first four months of 2009, the Sun became even more blank, the pace of sunspots slowing more.

“It’s been as dead as a doornail,” David Hathaway, a solar physicist at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Ala., said a couple of months ago.

The Sun perked up in June and July, with a sizeable clump of 20 sunspots earlier this month.

Now it is blank again, consistent with expectations that this solar cycle will be smaller and calmer, and the maximum of activity, expected to arrive in May 2013 will not be all that maximum.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/21/s...bl&ex=1248408000&en=26edfbfbe564636f&ei=5087

 

[Alan Partridge]

you know, the sun is reponsible for our increased temperatures on the plantt, not anything people can do...

 

[KittenKoder]

you know, the sun is reponsible for our increased temperatures on the plantt, not anything people can do...

Yeah, like the people who destroyed plant life that absorbs radiation and converts CO2 to O2 just because it was threatening a fish ...

Of course ... you can't blame the same people crying about how much warmer we are now for it ... can we ...

 

[Oddball]

Christine one-note, at it again.

 

[KittenKoder]

Christine one-note, at it again.

It's gone beyond boring ... "solar minimum" or "ice melting in the summer time" ... now I am just making fun of the idiots.

 

[Oddball]

It's all that's left, when information that doesn't come from IPCC or Algore is ignored.

 

[Alan Partridge]

It's all that's left, when information that doesn't come from IPCC or Algore is ignored.

I can agree about ignoring al gore, but the IPCC report is from actual scientists.

Most of Gore's science is legitimate, but the right doesn't like him, and he's a blowhard politician, so ignore him.

Nasa has some legit science regarding warming, as does NOAA, the epa, the russian space agency, India and Japan

 

[Oddball]

The IPCC report only accepted something like 7% of all the papers and information that were submitted to it.

Now, doesn't that make you wonder which information they cherry picked?

 

[KittenKoder]

It's all that's left, when information that doesn't come from IPCC or Algore is ignored.

I can agree about ignoring al gore, but the IPCC report is from actual scientists.

Most of Gore's science is legitimate, but the right doesn't like him, and he's a blowhard politician, so ignore him.

Nasa has some legit science regarding warming, as does NOAA, the epa, the russian space agency, India and Japan

Yeah "actual" scientists that are "actually" bribed by Gore and his corporations ... you just love supporting the rich fucks that don't deserve their money.

 

[Alan Partridge]

The IPCC report only accepted something like 7% of all the papers and information that were submitted to it.

Now, doesn't that make you wonder which information they cherry picked?

Do you have anything on that, because I can't find anything

 

[Alan Partridge]

It's all that's left, when information that doesn't come from IPCC or Algore is ignored.

I can agree about ignoring al gore, but the IPCC report is from actual scientists.

Most of Gore's science is legitimate, but the right doesn't like him, and he's a blowhard politician, so ignore him.

Nasa has some legit science regarding warming, as does NOAA, the epa, the russian space agency, India and Japan

Yeah "actual" scientists that are "actually" bribed by Gore and his corporations ... you just love supporting the rich fucks that don't deserve their money.

You do know that this was moving even before Al Gore got involved, don't you.

Scientists have been working on climate change for years, and most don't want to be associated with Gore due to the vilification from the right.

 

[Oddball]

The IPCC report only accepted something like 7% of all the papers and information that were submitted to it.

Now, doesn't that make you wonder which information they cherry picked?

Do you have anything on that, because I can't find anything

Another poster here has the hard numbers and links.

On top of that, many of the "scientists" on the IPCC were in fields that have absolutely nothing to do with meteorology or climate.

 

[Oddball]

Scientists have been working on climate change for years, and most don't want to be associated with Gore due to the vilification from the right.

Wouldn't want to be involved with him because he's a shameless demagogue and opportunistic profiteer, lest I fail to mention a flaming hypocrite.

 

[KittenKoder]

Scientists have been working on climate change for years, and most don't want to be associated with Gore due to the vilification from the right.

Wouldn't want to be involved with him because he's a shameless demagogue and opportunistic profiteer, lest I fail to mention a flaming hypocrite.

You beat me to it, but forgot a few facts that Chris likes to ignore. The original environmentalism movement wasn't about endorsing products, it was simple clean up after ourselves, a real solution that worked well. Then Gore got ahold of a document, one that he saw as an opportunity to profit on, if he made a few "changes" to it. A felt tip pen, 2 bucks, conning the world into supporting his companies, priceless.

 

[Alan Partridge]

The IPCC report only accepted something like 7% of all the papers and information that were submitted to it.

Now, doesn't that make you wonder which information they cherry picked?

Do you have anything on that, because I can't find anything

Another poster here has the hard numbers and links.

On top of that, many of the "scientists" on the IPCC were in fields that have absolutely nothing to do with meteorology or climate.

convienient, you can make the statement, and then dismiss me asking for clarification

what fields were they in?

 

[KittenKoder]

Do you have anything on that, because I can't find anything

Another poster here has the hard numbers and links.

On top of that, many of the "scientists" on the IPCC were in fields that have absolutely nothing to do with meteorology or climate.

convienient, you can make the statement, and then dismiss me asking for clarification

what fields were they in?

1. He stated the fields in that post.

2. Using information that even your own scientists have disregarded is really stupid.

 

[Alan Partridge]

so 20% were educated with weather and climate.

ok, engineers have a part to play as well, as do biologists and herpitologists. Zoologists wouldn't be suprising, neither would physicists. aeronautical engineers maybe, fast food workers, maybe not.

 

[Alan Partridge]

Another poster here has the hard numbers and links.

On top of that, many of the "scientists" on the IPCC were in fields that have absolutely nothing to do with meteorology or climate.

convienient, you can make the statement, and then dismiss me asking for clarification

what fields were they in?

1. He stated the fields in that post.

2. Using information that even your own scientists have disregarded is really stupid.

what post?
in this thread?

which information was disregarded?
Where was it used?

 

[KittenKoder]

so 20% were educated with weather and climate.

ok, engineers have a part to play as well, as do biologists and herpitologists. Zoologists wouldn't be suprising, neither would physicists. aeronautical engineers maybe, fast food workers, maybe not.

Most fast food workers I use to work with have better brains in their heads than you do.

Again, why do you support monopolies and giving the rich all of our money?

 

[KittenKoder]

convienient, you can make the statement, and then dismiss me asking for clarification

what fields were they in?

1. He stated the fields in that post.

2. Using information that even your own scientists have disregarded is really stupid.

what post?
in this thread?

which information was disregarded?
Where was it used?

You are new, so your lack of knowing what was discussed here already is just because you are too lazy to read through some of the threads, which also explains why you still only know the 5% of the story fed to you by the Gore machine.