Global Warming?

[Greatcloud]

The warming of the last part of the 20th century was caused by a continued high TSI that baked the Earth and caused El Nino's. The steady drop in TSI along with a delayed sunspot cycle is now causing a cooling period. Do you deny we are in a cooling period ?
It did not cool until the TSI had dropped for several consecutive years in a row,proving the sun was the culprit. As anyone can see now, and will see more in the future,when we are in a minimum,it is the sun. And what about all the planets warming at the same time and the same rate as the Earth, is this a GHG effect or is it the sun ? Don't look past the sun,it has always been the culprit in the warming and cooling phases of our planet. Why is it different now ?​

Quote- "Now I will speak of what I have found in the field of climate science, and you will be the
judge of whether or not I deserve to be included in De Smog Blog’s list. I believe that I
have made two useful contributions to the field, one of which is original. The first is my
prediction that a very weak Solar Cycle 24 will make the second decade of the 21st century
a very cold one. Others solar-driven predictions of cold decades to come have started with
Solar Cycle 25, or another three decades out in mid-century.
My work says that cold weather for the mid-latitudes is upon us now. The basis for that
prediction is simply this. There is one set of solar physicists who have correlated past solar
cycles with the temperature record, and there is another set of solar physicists who look
forward to predict solar activity. I simply applied the calibration provided by the former
set to the predictions made by the latter set. Very simple indeed, but nobody had done that
before.
Here’s what the data looks like. Figure 1 shows the solar cycle record back to 1700, with a
projection to 2030. Solar Cycles 4 and 5, in the early 19th century, were very weak. This
was also a period of cold temperatures globally called the Dalton Minimum. This might
just be a coincidence, but the correlation between solar cycle length and temperature is very
strong over at least the last three hundred years, as shown in my work on the De Bilt data,​

seen in Figure 2."-end Quote

http://www.lavoisier.com.au/papers/articles/ArchibaldLavoisierAGM.pdf

 

[chaim]

I certainly do deny we are in a cooling period. Take another look at at the data. How exactly does that indicate we are in a cooling period? I am glad that you are finally looking at the TSI data. Now the question is, what mechanism has caused the earth to warm at an unprecedented rate over the past 30 years, even though TSI has on average been steady to slightly decreasing? Due to the tremendous amounts of CO2 we have put in the atmosphere we have managed to essentially decouple the earths climate from fluctuations in solar radiation.

The warming of the last part of the 20th century was caused by a continued high TSI that baked the Earth and caused El Nino's. The steady drop in TSI along with a delayed sunspot cycle is now causing a cooling period. Do you deny we are in a cooling period ?
It did not cool until the TSI had dropped for several consecutive years in a row,proving the sun was the culprit. As anyone can see now, and will see more in the future,when we are in a minimum,it is the sun. And what about all the planets warming at the same time and the same rate as the Earth, is this a GHG effect or is it the sun ? Don't look past the sun,it has always been the culprit in the warming and cooling phases of our planet. Why is it different now ?​

Quote- "Now I will speak of what I have found in the field of climate science, and you will be the
judge of whether or not I deserve to be included in De Smog Blog’s list. I believe that I
have made two useful contributions to the field, one of which is original. The first is my
prediction that a very weak Solar Cycle 24 will make the second decade of the 21st century
a very cold one. Others solar-driven predictions of cold decades to come have started with
Solar Cycle 25, or another three decades out in mid-century.
My work says that cold weather for the mid-latitudes is upon us now. The basis for that
prediction is simply this. There is one set of solar physicists who have correlated past solar
cycles with the temperature record, and there is another set of solar physicists who look
forward to predict solar activity. I simply applied the calibration provided by the former
set to the predictions made by the latter set. Very simple indeed, but nobody had done that
before.
Here’s what the data looks like. Figure 1 shows the solar cycle record back to 1700, with a
projection to 2030. Solar Cycles 4 and 5, in the early 19th century, were very weak. This
was also a period of cold temperatures globally called the Dalton Minimum. This might
just be a coincidence, but the correlation between solar cycle length and temperature is very
strong over at least the last three hundred years, as shown in my work on the De Bilt data,​

seen in Figure 2."-end Quote

http://www.lavoisier.com.au/papers/articles/ArchibaldLavoisierAGM.pdf

 

[Greatcloud]

Look outside, walk out, feel the cold, that is reality and it is going to stay that way. Record snowfalls, record cold temperatures. This is the trend we have now and it will continue. Sunspot cycle 24 has not shown up and TSI is dropping, this spells cold weather for the foreseeable future.

High levels of TSI over many years caused the warming we had in the '90's, that is now over. TSI at a high level may not have increased but it stayed at a high level for 10 years. This high output acted like an oven and caused El Nino's and cooked our planet causing the warming. As long as the TSI did not go down it was increasing the level of heat "just like a chicken at 350 for an hour and a half". Do you see this, because that is what happened not some unproven GHG theory.​

 

[chaim]

It is a lot warmer right now than it was in the 90s - look at at the data! Your theory is no more proven than GHG theory which at least fits the data. I will repeat, TSI has been decreasing (albeit slowly) for at least the past 30 years, yet the temperatures have been getting warmer. Even though the TSI is lower now than it was in the the 90s the temperature is higher - how can you explain that with your theory? To use your chicken in the oven analogy, it is as if we had the chicken at 400, then turned the oven down to 350, but the chicken heated up to 450!

Look outside, walk out, feel the cold, that is reality and it is going to stay that way. Record snowfalls, record cold temperatures. This is the trend we have now and it will continue. Sunspot cycle 24 has not shown up and TSI is dropping, this spells cold weather for the foreseeable future.

High levels of TSI over many years caused the warming we had in the '90's, that is now over. TSI at a high level may not have increased but it stayed at a high level for 10 years. This high output acted like an oven and caused El Nino's and cooked our planet causing the warming. As long as the TSI did not go down it was increasing the level of heat "just like a chicken at 350 for an hour and a half". Do you see this, because that is what happened not some unproven GHG theory.​

 

[Greatcloud]

Does this look to you like TSI has been decreasing for 30 years ?

Looks like I get to eat the bird.

Take a look at this Russian scientist here:

http://www.martinfrost.ws/htmlfiles/jan2008/cold_spell.html


</IMG></IMG>

 

[chaim]

How on earth do you have a measurement of TSI from 1850????? In order to actually measure TSI you have to measure from outside the earths atmosphere, otherwise you are measuring TSI minus absorption form the atmosphere. We only have records of TSI going back to the first satellites in the late 1970s (which is the data I linked to). You might want to check the source of your data there. And even if you do believe that data, TSI has been flat from the 1950's, yet temperature has increased drastically. Previous to the 1950s temperature and TSI correlate quite well - why does it chaneg in the 1950s?

Does this look to you like TSI has been decreasing for 30 years ?

Looks like I get to eat the bird.

Take a look at this Russian scientist here:

http://www.martinfrost.ws/htmlfiles/jan2008/cold_spell.html


</IMG></IMG>

 

[chaim]

In fact if you look closely at this data, their measurement of "TSI" has been trending down since the mid 1980s - but the temperature continues to increase! I think the bird you are eating maybe crow.

Does this look to you like TSI has been decreasing for 30 years ?

Looks like I get to eat the bird.

Take a look at this Russian scientist here:

http://www.martinfrost.ws/htmlfiles/jan2008/cold_spell.html


</IMG></IMG>

 

[Greatcloud]

I don't think you can read a chart,the TSI goes up and down because of the sunspot cycle,if you read it correctly it is constant. TSI has stayed up since the fifties only in the last several years has it gone down. What do you think about the temperatures globally right now ? It is cold because TSI has decreased several years in a row now and the 24th sunspot cycle is late and probably won't come for a year still. These two things have combined to make it cold and it's going to get colder.​

All this cold and yet CO2 is at an all time high,why is that ?

CO2


Oh and here is your melting S. pole, see if you can read this diagram:

I don't see very much melting on this chart, do you ? Note how 2008 is predicted to be a 40 year high in ice growth,does that show a warming or a cooling trend ? </IMG>What is &#8220;Global&#8221; about the &#8220;Warming&#8221; if the Antarctic is cooling???? Also did you know that the S. Hemisphere has been rather steady in temperature and has not warmed in the same way that the N. Hemisphere has ? So these nagging questions from hard science are not going away. And from the other side there is no good answer, yet again.



Heres some John Christy for you.

A common feature of climate model forecasts is
that as CO​

​

​

2 increases, the global surface temperature
should rise along with an even more rapid warming
in the troposphere &#8212; the atmosphere up to about
30,000 feet. This additional atmospheric warming
would further promote warming at the surface &#8212; if
models are correct.
Surface temperature records indicate a long-term
atmospheric warming trend of about 3° Fahrenheit
per century.
Other research, however, finds the signs of major
global warming more difficult to identify.
Long-term studies of El Niño Pacific Ocean
warming events show that they are no more frequent
now than in the past millenia.(1)(2)​

Recent studies show sea conditions in the Arctic
today are similar to conditions in the late 19th and
early 20th centuries, while average Arctic temperatures
are rising almost to their levels of the
1930s.​

​

​

(3)(4)(5)​

Climate studies in the Antarctic report long-term
cooling trends on scales ranging from 30 to more
than 1,000 years, and that the ice cap there is growing.​

​

​

(
6)(7)(8)​

Studies of severe weather events in North
America found no evidence that extreme weather
events, including tornadoes, are more common or
more violent now than they were in the late
1800s.​

​

​

(9)(10)​

An analysis of hurricane and tropical cyclone
data found those storms are not becoming either
more frequent or more violent.​

​

​

(11)(12)​

A study of mean global sea level found the
approximately 3 mm/y rise of the past 150 years has
not accelerated during the 20th century.​

​

​

(13)​

And a recent Harvard-Smithsonian study​

​

​

(14) of
more than 240 paleoclimate research papers published
in the past four decades concluded that the
20th century was neither the warmest century nor the
century with the most extreme weather of the past​

1,000 years for specific regions.

 

[Greatcloud]

What we show here on this chart of global temperatures is a current cooling trend. And with the continued fall of TSI (output of the sun) and delay of sunspot cycle 24. This trend is predicted by many scientists to continue. Check out this link for verification.

above data is HadCRUT3 column 2 which can be found here


http://www.dailytech.com/Solar+Acti...hers+Predict+Another+Ice+Age/article10630.htm

World Temperatures With the temperature globally dropping fast just think what will happen when CO2 goes down,as it always does after temperature going down.
CO2

 

[Hagnismos]

It could get cold, it could get hot. The real scientists know that it will trend warmer as it has been since at least the early part of this century. That there could be retracement in a system like this is not a surprise. The clue is the increased variability, which suggests that more record warm years are likely in the future, any one of which could push permafrost melt and albedo into areas that produce a runaway greenhouse effect.

Science being what it is, there are also some scary climate type things talked about in the Book of Revelation. Anyone notice how similar the present concerns are to those prophecies?

 

[stranger]

It appears that all the global warming models ignore many of the effects known to affect climate, and significantly cannot explain the rapidity of warming of the North pole that has opened the Northwest passage north of Canada ...

What will ultimately be more important is that last time the polar ice melted the change in pressures on tectonic plates covering our molten inner earth caused massive vulcanism...

previous slower less-dramatic global warming caused massive ammounts of volcanic ejection into the atmosphere which reduced the sunlight and froze the earth into ice age ... the effect on life was just as devastating as the rising temperatures are now [some four times faster than nature's adaptation by moving eco-systems can cope with]

The interesting feature for this on this site is that the vulcanism blotting out the sun and turning the moon blood-red is prophesied by Jesus in the scripture as part of the wrath of God on all sinners [whether they call themselves 'Christian' or not]

 

[thaumaturgy]

What we show here on this chart of global temperatures is a current cooling trend. And with the continued fall of TSI (output of the sun) and delay of sunspot cycle 24. This trend is predicted by many scientists to continue. Check out this link for verification.

above data is HadCRUT3 column 2 which can be found here


DailyTech - Solar Activity Diminishes; Researchers Predict Another Ice Age

World Temperatures With the temperature globally dropping fast just think what will happen when CO2 goes down,as it always does after temperature going down.
CO2

Hey Greatcloud,
Could you do me a favor and run a time-series analysis on that graph? I'm at home right now and all I have is my R stats software and I'm still learning it. My JMP is at work so I can't easily run the numbers.

Things to check for:

1. Is there a larger, overall "secular trend" upwards?

2. If one does a linear fit of the cyclical data what does the F-test say about line? (zero or non-zero? Positive or negative?)

 

[thaumaturgy]

Greatcloud hasn't bothered to respond to my request.

I sure would like to see some actual nuts-n-bolts science here. Will I have to provide it?

Guess so.

I took the second column of data you posted and plotted it. SURE it contains CYCLES, ups and downs.

But guess what? It also appears to contain what is called a secular trend that is statistically non-zero. In this case it looks like the overall trend of the data is going up.

Note that little F-statistic in the corner. The associated p-value means it is statistically significantly "non-zero".

I'd be glad to revisit the data if you have found a different result. I hope I graphed the same numbers you were talking about.

Let me know.

(If you don't have access to a stats software package you can go with R, it's got a steep learning curve but it's a nice freeware program that is getting a lot of traction in academia and industry these days. The Comprehensive R Archive Network)

 

[thaumaturgy]

Bumped for GreatCloud's response. I'm still waiting. I mean, I thought GreatCloud would care to comment on a graph he drew a conclusion on. I have done some of the legwork for him.

I thought this was an important topic. Am I wrong?

 

[TemperateSeaIsland]

Greatcloud hasn't bothered to respond to my request.

I sure would like to see some actual nuts-n-bolts science here. Will I have to provide it?

Guess so.

I took the second column of data you posted and plotted it. SURE it contains CYCLES, ups and downs.

But guess what? It also appears to contain what is called a secular trend that is statistically non-zero. In this case it looks like the overall trend of the data is going up.

Note that little F-statistic in the corner. The associated p-value means it is statistically significantly "non-zero".

I'd be glad to revisit the data if you have found a different result. I hope I graphed the same numbers you were talking about.

Let me know.

(If you don't have access to a stats software package you can go with R, it's got a steep learning curve but it's a nice freeware program that is getting a lot of traction in academia and industry these days. The Comprehensive R Archive Network)

Is that in degrees C? If so it seems to be a bit steep considering the timespan.

 

[thaumaturgy]

Is that in degrees C? If so it seems to be a bit steep considering the timespan.

As far as I can tell it is the same dataset that GreatCloud originally posted. I just replotted it and ran a linear regression using R.

Now the question I still have (and why I find this dataset so fascinating) is; is this a real trend or is it an artifact of a low number of cycles of a cyclical feature?

There does appear to be a periodicity to some of the data. But the secular trend is what I find fascinating. Is it real?

 

[thaumaturgy]

Global warming is real. People have to grasp that first. Is it caused by man, natural, or both is the question. I am not telling people I'm a Geology major to boast.

You should. Geology is something to boast about.

Right now we are studying little marine fossils that lived thousands of years ago to try to map paleoclimates. I'm not going into that because It's very hard to explain to someone who doesn't understand crystal kinetics.

I wish you would go into that! I think I could understand to some degree.

What I would suggest right now given our information is that we need to be smart about energy consumption.

BRAVO!

Even if global warming isn't being accelerated by humans we should still not want to pollute our environment any more than possible.

Hear! Hear!

It only makes sense to conserve because pullution can also cause cancers and other health problems. We need to find better energy resources and we need to all work together to limit CO2 emissions. That's all we can do at this point. There's no reason to debate whether it's real or if scientists are all crazy because we aren't crazy and we aren't lieing. Just be smart and become a little more Earth friendly. There's nothing anti Christian about being good to the Earth. I believe that if there is a God who cares about his people he would want us to take care of what he has given us.

I don't believe I could have said it better myself! Thank you!

 

[thaumaturgy]

One thing I wanted to say is that volcanic ash isn't red. I have however seen a red moon on many occasions when the sun has reflected off of it at night.

Actually with the right size particle one may see more "red scattering", so regardless of what color the particles are, the red frequencies may scatter more efficiently with certain particle sizes.