Mini-Ice Age Coming?

[movieplay]

also up2u2 is posting the same graphs over and over and then making the same point, even after that point was retorted, again he posts this graph that he gets from the global warming industry that is supposed to show that the MIA 'had nothing to do with solar minimums-this utter bullshit.. i already responded to that:

Issue with the sporer and wolf minimum is that there was no one back then taking accurate sunspot counts,so exactly where it is is uncertain but it was definitely there; the reason that first graph i posted only goes back to appox 1600 which is why it's labeled '400 years of sunspot observations' is because that's the time frame where the sunspot observations are accurate.. BUT on the sunspot graph on page 1, you will notice that the Dalton Minimum was around 1800-1820 BUT the coldest temperatures took place in the 1840s even close to 1850 before the solar maximums stabilized up until now. That's because it takes a couple decades for the earth to 'register' the cooling effects of reduced solar activity + increased cloud coverage caused by solar minimum.

ALL we are feeling now is a below average cycle 23, and its already create cold extremes, we can only imagine what it will be like in 2020,25,30 when the solar cycles really start to bottom out..

[up2u2]

also up2u2 is posting the same graphs over and over and then making the same point, even after that point was retorted, again he posts this graph that he gets from the global warming industry that is supposed to show that the MIA 'had nothing to do with solar minimums-this utter bullshit.. i already responded to that:

Issue with the sporer and wolf minimum is that there was no one back then taking accurate sunspot counts,so exactly where it is is uncertain but it was definitely there; the reason that first graph i posted only goes back to appox 1600 which is why it's labeled '400 years of sunspot observations' is because that's the time frame where the sunspot observations are accurate.. BUT on the sunspot graph on page 1, you will notice that the Dalton Minimum was around 1800-1820 BUT the coldest temperatures took place in the 1840s even close to 1850 before the solar maximums stabilized up until now. That's because it takes a couple decades for the earth to 'register' the cooling effects of reduced solar activity + increased cloud coverage caused by solar minimum.

ALL we are feeling now is a below average cycle 23, and its already create cold extremes, we can only imagine what it will be like in 2020,25,30 when the solar cycles really start to bottom out..

So where is your evidence that the Earth is cooling due to Solar Activity. Graph Global Temperatures and Solar Activity. Simple.

Post the published 'sunspot counts' from 'back then' and demonstrate why they are inaccurate.

Where is your scientific evidence that the Earth is cooling?

Where is your scientific evidence that demonstrates a 20 year lag time between Solar Minimums and cooling effects?

Where is your scientific projected modelling that shows Solar Minimums will reverse Global Warming?

[ricklev]

Just curious..... For those of you who don't believe climate change is real, do you believe that the ozone hole is real and related to our use of chlorofluorocarbons?

I remember when many people believed that was a hoax.

http://theconversation.com/saving-the-ozone-layer-why-the-montreal-protocol-worked-9249

Edited August 30, 2015 by ricklev

[up2u2]

Wow ! The red colour on that globe sure looks scary and hot....

Oh... wait..... it shows only in the 50's and 60's F. But it sure is a nice graphic to raise a bit of alarm in people that don't know any better.

Why would anyone be alarmed it shows the 2014 Polar Vortex in USA. The cold air escaping from the Arctic.

[movieplay]

No to changing topics to ozone please, and this isn't a climate change denier thread, everyone posting here believes in climate change, (i snickered earlier how the media and mainstream pundits continue to gravitate to this "Climate Change" slogan as the "global Warming" thing is abandoned-just rememebr its climate change now, now your task is to bash "climate change deniers", not "Global Warming" deniers, its Climate Change now }

obviously its a thread about the coming Mini Ice Age, and specifically the theory that A.Global Warming will 'stop' the MIA that has already started. Since up2u2 refuses to put forward any other possible explanation for the 2014 polar vortex and other record breaking colds that have already been linked then it has to be considered in its early stages already.

also here is an explanation with scientists and charts showing the solar cycle's impact on climate, see 28:30..

again, like i said i don't need to post my own cahrts showing cooling there are enough scientists and researchers doing that and i already linked to those earlier in the thread.. as far as this new demand for scientific evidence and modeling.. i think at this point the preponderance of the evidence is clearly pointing to a MIA, especially when you consider my last link to the history channel where scientists describe a MIA not so much as an averages and means thing, but rather extreme colds and more rains, the adapt2030 channel has afull episode on recent increased rains and the extreme cold phenomenon that is in continuum.. as this weather continues in this direction going into the future it will be harder and harder for the global warming position to hold water-especially the illogical part where global warming cancels out extreme cold weather phenomenon oh but it's a 'bad' thing, stupidest fuking thing i ever heard, what utter non-sence.. at least 'I' still think air pollution is bad, guess its just me now, the Global Warmists nuts are now telling us its bad but it prevents the extreme cold conditions of solar minimums so it's good but bad..

i'm sure anyone who has read through this thread will continue to monitor the weather and notice extreme colds more than averages.

[teacherofwoe]

Mini ice age: normal

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/River_Thames_frost_fairs

Global warming: obviously

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temperature_record

[ricklev]

I'm just curious to know if anyone believes the ozone hole was and is naturally occurring and was and is not influenced by chlorofluorocarbons and other industrial gas emissions.

I ask, because it seems the arguments against climate change being caused by CO2 emissions seem to be very similar.

[up2u2]

No to changing topics to ozone please, and this isn't a climate change denier thread, everyone posting here believes in climate change, (i snickered earlier how the media and mainstream pundits continue to gravitate to this "Climate Change" slogan as the "global Warming" thing is abandoned-just rememebr its climate change now, now your task is to bash "climate change deniers", not "Global Warming" deniers, its Climate Change now }

obviously its a thread about the coming Mini Ice Age, and specifically the theory that A.Global Warming will 'stop' the MIA that has already started. Since up2u2 refuses to put forward any other possible explanation for the 2014 polar vortex and other record breaking colds that have already been linked then it has to be considered in its early stages already.

also here is an explanation with scientists and charts showing the solar cycle's impact on climate, see 28:30..

again, like i said i don't need to post my own cahrts showing cooling there are enough scientists and researchers doing that and i already linked to those earlier in the thread.. as far as this new demand for scientific evidence and modeling.. i think at this point the preponderance of the evidence is clearly pointing to a MIA, especially when you consider my last link to the history channel where scientists describe a MIA not so much as an averages and means thing, but rather extreme colds and more rains, the adapt2030 channel has afull episode on recent increased rains and the extreme cold phenomenon that is in continuum.. as this weather continues in this direction going into the future it will be harder and harder for the global warming position to hold water-especially the illogical part where global warming cancels out extreme cold weather phenomenon oh but it's a 'bad' thing, stupidest fuking thing i ever heard, what utter non-sence.. at least 'I' still think air pollution is bad, guess its just me now, the Global Warmists nuts are now telling us its bad but it prevents the extreme cold conditions of solar minimums so it's good but bad..

i'm sure anyone who has read through this thread will continue to monitor the weather and notice extreme colds more than averages.

Where is your scientific evidence that a Mini Ice Age has started?

So where is your scientific evidence that a Solar Minimum caused the 2014 Polar Vortex? You haven't actually provided any.

If you are saying that the Earth is cooling where is the scientific evidence that the earth is currently cooling? Just one will do. Up till now all you have done is stated that it is cooling.

The 'documentary' video @ 28:30 mentions a weather man that predicted the weather using Solar Activity. Do you have his peer reviewed scientific paper demonstrating the upcoming Little Ice Age due to reduced Solar Activity?

The Adapt2030 showed some guy extrapolating Arctic Winter snow falls in 2014 into the Arctic is gaining in Ice Volume. Do you have a link to his peer reviewed scientific research that demonstrates this and how a Solar Minimum is cooling the Earth? It is a pretty big call from one seasons Winter Cycle and not even accounting for a Summer cycle where all that snow and ice melts. He couldn't even decide whether it was linear or exponential gain.

A weather man on a documentary and some guy using one Winter's snow fall in the Arctic = Mini Ice Age and no evidence the Earth is cooling. Hardly a preponderance of evidence.

[canuckamuck]

Why can't you start another thread about that. I would like to know more about it.

The main difference between the two issues is that there was no upside politically or financially in the fight against fluorocarbons. So if it was a scam, who had anything to gain from it?

Anyhow, lets stick to the upcoming ice age, Its a great topic.

[cumgranosalum]

BTW - this year just gone was globally the hottest on record........

[canuckamuck]

BTW - this year just gone was globally the hottest on record........

By how much?

[up2u2]

BTW - this year just gone was globally the hottest on record........

By how much?

I thought your question would have been to 'movieplayer' concerning how much the Earth has cooled due to lower solar activity?

[canuckamuck]

facile deflection

[cumgranosalum]

Well people have written at length on this so it is unlikely they are going to turn round and agree that a Mini Ice Age is in fact based on an untenable premise.......but it is..so there.

next time thery should put more effort into checking their sources and less into the length of the post.

Edited August 30, 2015 by cumgranosalum

[cumgranosalum]

I think the actual "seasons" have shifted.

No they haven't - the nature of the seasons may be less constant or more extreme, but shifted? What makes you think that?

[canuckamuck]

Well you wrote quite a long piece on this so it is unlikely you are going to turn round and agree that it is in fact based on an untenable premise.......but it is..so there.

next time put more effort into checking your sources and less into the length of the post.

Why don't you just say you don't know?

[cumgranosalum]

BTW - this year just gone was globally the hottest on record........

By how much?

What a silly question! If you want to take part in this discussion just get up to speed on the info...if you disagree, make your point clearly and someone will answer - as for providing you with references on a subject you have chosen to take a stand on.....PLEASE get your info straight first asking inane questions like that just show how little you understand about how to have a discussion.

[cumgranosalum]

BTW - this year just gone was globally the hottest on record........

By how much?

What a silly question! If you want to take part in this discussion just get up to speed on the info...if you disagree, make your point clearly and someone will answer - as for providing you with references on a subject you have chosen to take a stand on.....PLEASE get your info straight first asking inane questions like that just show how little you understand about how to have a discussion.

[canuckamuck]

It was a simple question, I did not mean to embarrass you so much.

Edited August 30, 2015 by canuckamuck

[up2u2]

BTW - this year just gone was globally the hottest on record........

By how much?

Global highlights: Year-to-date (January–July 2015)

• The year-to-date temperature combined across global land and ocean surfaces was 1.53°F (0.85°C) above the 20^th century average. This was the highest for January–July in the 1880–2015 record, surpassing the previous record set in 2010 by 0.16°F (0.09°C).
• The year-to-date globally-averaged land surface temperature was 2.41°F (1.34°C) above the 20^th century average. This was the highest for January–July in the 1880–2015 record, surpassing the previous record of 2007 by 0.27°F (0.15°C).
• The year-to-date globally-averaged sea surface temperature was 1.21°F (0.67°C) above the 20^th century average. This was also the highest for January–July in the 1880–2015 record, surpassing the previous record of 2010 by 0.11°F (0.06°C). Every major ocean basin observed record warmth in some areas.

[opalred]

starting to get like a speech from al goring

[canuckamuck]

Well I was hoping for the previous years data as it is a complete year, but I appreciate the effort.

So 9/100ths of a degree for the first half of 2015 is it. If it is a cold winter this year I would say that record will be easily lost. and 0.09 that's about half of the uncertainty factor 0.14 for NOAA's statistics.

So in realty they do not know which year was actually hotter and it is all just split hairs and has been that way since the big el Niño year of 1998

There's El Niño this year too so you might just get your record.

But all of this is all really disappointing because I have been promised there is a connection between atmospheric CO2 levels and global temperature. I see the CO2 going up but where the heck is temperature rise?

Here's an illustration

[up2u2]

Well I was hoping for the previous years data as it is a complete year, but I appreciate the effort.

So 9/100ths of a degree for the first half of 2015 is it. If it is a cold winter this year I would say that record will be easily lost. and 0.09 that's about half of the uncertainty factor 0.14 for NOAA's statistics.

So in realty they do not know which year was actually hotter and it is all just split hairs and has been that way since the big el Niño year of 1998

There's El Niño this year too so you might just get your record.

But all of this is all really disappointing because I have been promised there is a connection between atmospheric CO2 levels and global temperature. I see the CO2 going up but where the heck is temperature rise?

Here's an illustration

Can you provide a link or the peer review tag for that scientific paper the graphic is from?

[ausbeat999]

everybody on this topic , do yourself a favour and watch this. It's for your own good.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=RD2lABk16qE

[up2u2]

Got it canuck it is a climate4you graph and is not attached to any peer reviewed science. If you want to run your own data streams climate4you web site allows you to mix and match data sets you download and provides the software to run them. Good fun. This is just one Steve ran on hadcrut data.

You would not expect a direct correlation running surface temperature data only against CO2 atmospheric concentrations.

Only 3% of warming goes into the atmosphere the other 97% goes into the Ocean and it is variable so you have to run upper and lower Ocean temps as well to pick up the heat going into and out of the Oceans.

[mogandave]

So as a percentage, how much of a reduction in CO2 emissions would it take to significantly slow the rate at which the Earth is warming?

[canuckamuck]

Got it canuck it is a climate4you graph and is not attached to any peer reviewed science. If you want to run your own data streams climate4you web site allows you to mix and match data sets you download and provides the software to run them. Good fun. This is just one Steve ran on hadcrut data.

You would not expect a direct correlation running surface temperature data only against CO2 atmospheric concentrations.

Only 3% of warming goes into the atmosphere the other 97% goes into the Ocean and it is variable so you have to run upper and lower Ocean temps as well to pick up the heat going into and out of the Oceans.

I just pulled it from a quick google search, I don't care who made it, I don't even know. It is the figures that are important. They give a temperature rise of about .5 since the 60's and the have CO2 at 400ppm up from about 320 so I can't see why this needs to be peer reviewed. These are the general figures. CO2 is climbing at a steady pace and the temperature is not. If you like just disregard the chart, it doesn't change the facts. CO2 and temperature have divorced recently.

Which is just as well because CO2 was always centuries behind temperature rise anyways so the relationship is temperature dependant and not the other way around.

[canuckamuck]

So as a percentage, how much of a reduction in CO2 emissions would it take to significantly slow the rate at which the Earth is warming?

Good question.

[opalred]

does this mean the frangarsholeis and exwifeybitchatorarse with dinorsorious will be extent

[Somtamme]

I don't see anything to do with cooling here, moreover predictions of sea-level rise, maybe an under-estimate

http://noc.ac.uk/science-technology/climate-sea-level/sea-level/measuring-sea-level-change