tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17839575.post1675243699128229235..comments2024-03-17T23:50:03.863+08:00Comments on Government and Taxes: It's the Sun, stupid!Bienvenido Oplas Jrhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07799756132761366267noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17839575.post-23424868939355861522009-03-31T22:06:00.000+08:002009-03-31T22:06:00.000+08:00Sorry, I meant www.heartland.org, not heartlandins...Sorry, I meant www.heartland.org, not heartlandinstitute.org. Apologies for that.<BR/><BR/>About Willie Soon's charts, I copy-pasted some of his charts in my presentation here in Manila, http://www.minimalgovernment.net/media/mg_20090327.pdf. <BR/><BR/>Dr. Soon plugged solar activities vs. global temperature, there is an almost perfect fit. Then he tried the same for CO2 and global temperature, there is no fit.<BR/><BR/>Another astrophysicist I mentioned in my presentation is that of Dr. Piers Corbyn of weatheraction.com.<BR/><BR/>I think the charts and argument made by Dr. Soon, Dr. Corbyn, Dr. Easterbrook, etc. are substantial enough.Bienvenido Oplas Jrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07799756132761366267noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17839575.post-49982259577460398692009-03-30T16:39:00.000+08:002009-03-30T16:39:00.000+08:00Nonoy, have you tried clicking on your Heartland I...Nonoy, have you tried clicking on your Heartland Institute link? It leads nowhere.<BR/><BR/>My mention of Willie Soon's misadventures is not an ad hominem. Those are facts.<BR/><BR/>But when Willie Soon calls climate scientists "Stupid" ("It's the Sun, Stupid"), that in fact is an ad hominem.<BR/><BR/>Are you saying that it is wrong to point out that Willie is hardly a reliable source for information on climate? He is the one who produced that phoney study on polar bears, and he is the one who needs to answer for it.<BR/><BR/>You mentioned his graphs. He shows less than one tenth of one percent change in solar radiance causing "temperature anomalies", without explaining what the source of data is or what the meaning is of a temperature "anomalie". He also confuses sunspot numbers with warming effects from the sun, and they just do not correlate.<BR/><BR/>Again, as I wrote above, take a look at sunspot cycles in the 20th century. If sunspots cause warming, then why didn't global warming peak in 1958-1959, the peak of sunspot cycle 19?<BR/><BR/>Here is a source of historical sunspot data.<BR/><BR/>http://tinyurl.com/d7svb4<BR/><BR/>The second chart from the top shows sunspot activity for the entire 20th century.Tadhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12068448368001128294noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17839575.post-1589023810973869502009-03-29T17:49:00.000+08:002009-03-29T17:49:00.000+08:00The comment by "Tad" is ad hominem attack, it is a...The comment by "Tad" is ad hominem attack, it is attacking the bearer of the news, not the news itself.<BR/><BR/>I saw the links given, there was no chart showing that solar activity has little or zero correlation with global temperature, past and present. Dr. Willie Soon showed lots of charts showing direct fit between solar activities and global temperature. <BR/><BR/>Visit wwww.heartlandinstitute.org, or www.minimalgovernment.net, "The Sun vs CO2".Bienvenido Oplas Jrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07799756132761366267noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17839575.post-79130398727577421162009-03-29T17:31:00.000+08:002009-03-29T17:31:00.000+08:00This comment has been removed by the author.Bienvenido Oplas Jrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07799756132761366267noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17839575.post-36165016840796933462009-03-27T09:41:00.000+08:002009-03-27T09:41:00.000+08:00Keeping in mind that windmills are hazardous to bi...Keeping in mind that windmills are hazardous to birds, be wary of the unintended consequences of believing and contributing to the all-knowing environmental lobby groups. <BR/>The climate celebrities are linking climate and the economy. Yes, there has been warming since the Pleistocene. Climate is a multiple input, multiple loops, multiple output, and complex system. The facts and the hypotheses, however, do not support CO2 as a serious 'pollutant'. In fact, it is plant fertilizer and seriously important to all life on the planet. It is the red herring used to unwind our economy. That issue makes the science relevant.<BR/>Water vapour (0.4% overall by volume in air, but 1 – 4 % near the surface) is the most effective green house gas followed by methane (0.0001745%). The third ranking greenhouse gas is CO2 (0.0383%), and it does not correlate well with global warming or cooling either; in fact, CO2 in the atmosphere trails warming which is clear natural evidence for its well-studied inverse solubility in water: CO2 dissolves in cold water and bubbles out of warm water. The equilibrium in seawater is very high; making seawater a great 'sink'; CO2 is 34 times more soluble in water than air is soluble in water.<BR/>CO2 has been rising and Earth and her oceans have been warming. However, the correlation trails. Correlation, moreover, is not causation. The causation is studied, however, and while the radiation from the sun varies only in the fourth decimal place, the magnetism is awesome. <BR/>“Using a box of air in a Copenhagen lab, physicists traced the growth of clusters of molecules of the kind that build cloud condensation nuclei. These are specks of sulphuric acid on which cloud droplets form. High-energy particles driven through the laboratory ceiling by exploded stars far away in the Galaxy - the cosmic rays - liberate electrons in the air, which help the molecular clusters to form much faster than climate scientists have modeled in the atmosphere. That may explain the link between cosmic rays, cloudiness and climate change.” <BR/>As I understand it, the hypothesis of the Danish National Space Center goes as follows:<BR/>Quiet sun → reduced magnetic and thermal flux = reduced solar wind → geomagnetic shield drops → galactic cosmic ray flux → more low-level clouds and more snow → more albedo effect (more heat reflected) → colder climate<BR/>Active sun → enhanced magnetic and thermal flux = solar wind → geomagnetic shield response → less low-level clouds → less albedo (less heat reflected) → warmer climate<BR/>That is how the bulk of climate change might work, coupled with (modulated by) sunspot peak frequency there are cycles of global warming and cooling like waves in the ocean. When the waves are closely spaced, the planets warm; when the waves are spaced farther apart, the planets cool.<BR/>The ultimate cause of the solar magnetic cycle may be cyclicity in the Sun-Jupiter centre of gravity. We await more on that. <BR/>Although the post 60s warming period appears to be over, it has allowed the principal green house gas, water vapour, to kick in with more humidity, clouds, rain and snow depending on where you live to provide the negative feedback that scientists use to explain the existence of complex life on Earth for 550 million years. Ancient sedimentary rocks and paleontological evidence indicate the planet has had abundant liquid water over the entire span. The planet heats and cools naturally and our gasses are the thermostat. <BR/>Check the web site of the Danish National Space Center.<BR/> http://www.space.dtu.dk/English/Research/Research_divisions/Sun_Climate/Experiments_SC/SKY.aspxAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17839575.post-88274132952540253452009-03-26T17:33:00.000+08:002009-03-26T17:33:00.000+08:00Willie Soon is a discredited scientist who has rec...Willie Soon is a discredited scientist who has received money from Exxon Mobile to deny global warming. He is the one who caused all the embarrasment for Sarah Palin, with his fraudulent Polar Bear study, which she cited in her opposition to having it listed as an endangered species.<BR/><BR/>Solar irradiance varies very little with the solar cycle.....about .01%. Solar activity peaked in 1958, and we have never seen a sunspot cycle as big. The sunspot cycle does not correlate with warming. In fact, sunspots are COOLER areas on the surface of the sun, not warmer.<BR/><BR/>Check this out:<BR/><BR/>http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=634#comment-107910Tadhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12068448368001128294noreply@blogger.com