If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Discover)   Hey, remember how the lack of sunspots was going to be plunge us into an Ice Age? Yeah, about that   (blogs.discovermagazine.com) divider line 109
    More: Followup, Little Ice Age, Maunder Minimum, climate change denial, solar cycles, ice cores, Death from the Skies, global cooling, jet stream  
•       •       •

13212 clicks; posted to Main » on 17 Jun 2011 at 4:09 PM (3 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



109 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2011-06-17 04:12:29 PM
was going to be plunge us
 
2011-06-17 04:14:45 PM
Hey, remember how the lack of sunspots was going to be plunge us into an Ice Age?

So, Subby, I don't.
 
2011-06-17 04:14:55 PM
Clearly the answer to global warming is nuking a volcano.
 
2011-06-17 04:15:58 PM

LouDobbsAwaaaay: So, Subby, I don't.


And by 'So', I mean 'No', which was totally intentional and not in any way embarrassing.
 
2011-06-17 04:16:55 PM

Sanic123: Clearly the answer to global warming is nuking a volcano.


That's what Xenu did.
 
2011-06-17 04:17:15 PM

LouDobbsAwaaaay: Hey, remember how the lack of sunspots was going to be plunge us into an Ice Age?

So, Subby, I don't.


I see what you there
 
2011-06-17 04:18:42 PM
Hmmm. Maybe meant to be "...was going to be plungeous.....Iceous Ageous.."

/slasheous.
 
2011-06-17 04:20:05 PM
Ice ages do not work that way?
 
2011-06-17 04:22:42 PM
There was a great interview with The Bad Astronomer on The Skeptics' Guide To The Universe (new window) this week.
 
2011-06-17 04:24:26 PM
No, I didn't hear about it, because I don't go to derp-filled teabagger nitwit sites.
 
2011-06-17 04:25:47 PM
...bag of snapshots?
*turns head to upright position*
Ohhh.. sunspots.
 
2011-06-17 04:26:40 PM
And people like Gore chided us for global warming not being a good thing. In 20 years when it's like late September weather and I'm burning a few tires on my lawn...who will be laughing then?

/me probably from the inhalation induced brain damage
 
2011-06-17 04:28:48 PM
It's silly of you to think that the Sun has any effect on the Earth's temperature or climate. Now, go back to carbon trading, citizen!
 
2011-06-17 04:29:02 PM
"...the execrable Daily Mail..."

LOL
 
2011-06-17 04:37:14 PM
FTFA: 3) We're not even all that sure we're headed for an extended minimum of anything.

small correction

Nice of him to share his opinion.
Wish there was some actual science to study.

Now, trot out your lying prepaid silly concensual graphs and pretend science.
 
2011-06-17 04:38:35 PM

busy chillin': was going to be plunge us


The alternate future imperfect counterfactual tense always screws me up as well.
Travel to the past and future of alternate dimensions where things that the Daily Fail say are true has caused havoc among grammarians in at least seven distinct timelines.
 
2011-06-17 04:39:05 PM

Anagrammer: I never passed any science class I ever took


Yes, we can tell.
 
2011-06-17 04:43:40 PM
"correlation does not imply causation"

I thought that what's global warming was all about.
 
2011-06-17 04:45:46 PM
FTFA --

"Note: a lot of this is taken from my book "Death from the Skies!", where I interviewed approximately a bazillion people."
 
2011-06-17 04:47:26 PM
don't worry, we got a plan:
26.media.tumblr.com
 
2011-06-17 04:49:14 PM

FloydA: busy chillin': was going to be plunge us

The alternate future imperfect counterfactual tense always screws me up as well.
Travel to the past and future of alternate dimensions where things that the Daily Fail say are true has caused havoc among grammarians in at least seven distinct timelines.


That wasn't not having to have going to have soon already been, but they reverted after I went back and killed hitler.

wtf?
 
2011-06-17 04:49:40 PM
Good Lord, these spitballers are MORONS. They wave their hands in the air and scream "Maunder Minimum, Maunder Minimum" and think that a downturn in the acute sunspot number and solar flux as a doomsday horsecrap.

Cycle 24 was a but slow in starting but the average for the very first year of a cycle is just that, up and down like like a rubber ball until the cycle is in full swing, usually close to the end of a cycle's second year. The uptick of the current cycle started well but had slowed a bit in the short-term as far as smoothed sunspot number, solar flux, and sunspots with solar flares in all classes. This is a normal cycle.

The former cycles going back to the late 1600 have been well documented and can be found with a simple GIS here in the internet.
 
2011-06-17 04:59:07 PM
I don't remember anything about sunspots being involved, but Mr. Spock told me an Ice Age was coming (new window), so it must be true.

img808.imageshack.us
 
2011-06-17 05:01:45 PM
Not proposing any theory, but,
This could be as good as it gets for homo sap.

Oh noes, it is Peak People!
 
2011-06-17 05:04:21 PM
And if you have the attention span of an E. coli bacterium

*Laughs*
Good one.
 
2011-06-17 05:07:06 PM
Last I checked, we already are in an ice age. Ice ages are defined by there being ice at the poles. Specifically we are just in the middle of an interglacial period. If there were no polar ice caps, we would not be in the midst of an ice age.

/needed to get that out, won't be reading tfa
 
2011-06-17 05:16:17 PM

LouDobbsAwaaaay: Hey, remember how the lack of sunspots was going to be plunge us into an Ice Age?

So, Subby, I don't.


I remember a ton of wingnuts who were derping on about sunspots for a good year or so as if it meant something in particular.

Is that what subby means?
 
2011-06-17 05:18:23 PM

rockradio1: Cycle 24 was a but slow in starting but the average for the very first year of a cycle is just that, up and down like like a rubber ball until the cycle is in full swing, usually close to the end of a cycle's second year. The uptick of the current cycle started well but had slowed a bit in the short-term as far as smoothed sunspot number, solar flux, and sunspots with solar flares in all classes. This is a normal cycle.


According to wiki we are now 3 1/2 years into Cycle 24, and even NASA's own AGW enthusiasts now acknowledge that Cycle 24 is going to be the smallest in more than 100 years. This is not a "normal" cycle by either recent or long-term standards.
 
2011-06-17 05:22:15 PM
You know . . . once you get past that whole debunked faked data thing, and Egor I mean Algore telling us that the oceans will rise 20 feet and then buying a multi-million dollar mansion on the coast, cap and rape, and the polar bear floating away on a melting iceberg picture taken in late August, and so many other "shakes magic ball" bogus theories . . . can't Global warming seem pretty real???

However, what is really important to know, "What kind of Asians have a really huge willy? Why Caucasians of course!
 
2011-06-17 05:30:46 PM
LOL. The sun is too far away to affect us. It's the chemtrails we really have to watch out for.
 
2011-06-17 05:36:29 PM

LOTN: FloydA: busy chillin': was going to be plunge us

The alternate future imperfect counterfactual tense always screws me up as well.
Travel to the past and future of alternate dimensions where things that the Daily Fail say are true has caused havoc among grammarians in at least seven distinct timelines.

That wasn't not having to have going to have soon already been, but they reverted after I went back and killed hitler.

wtf?



Again?

Damit! Doesn't anyone ever read IATT Bulletin 1147?
 
2011-06-17 05:40:04 PM
No, I don't remember it either.
Subby sounds like a loon.
 
2011-06-17 05:43:52 PM
Short version of the article and just as accurate: There IS a link between sun spots and climate but NO ONE has as yet figured out the exact mechanism.
 
2011-06-17 05:45:18 PM

snocone: FTFA: 3) We're not even all that sure we're headed for an extended minimum of anything.

small correction

Nice of him to share his opinion.
Wish there was some actual science to study.

Now, trot out your lying prepaid silly concensual graphs and pretend science.


True, and I can hardly wait until we start forcibly rewiring multi-trillion dollar economies based on things we "aren't sure about."

Here's an idea: let's wait until we're sure.
 
2011-06-17 05:46:14 PM
So, correlation doesn't mean causation. Who'd have thunk it? I mean, all these volcanoes erupting, spewing an assload more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere than all the cars put together, but they obviously have nothing to do with it, (because politics is useless against a volcano.)
 
2011-06-17 06:00:20 PM

Stone Meadow: rockradio1: Cycle 24 was a but slow in starting but the average for the very first year of a cycle is just that, up and down like like a rubber ball until the cycle is in full swing, usually close to the end of a cycle's second year. The uptick of the current cycle started well but had slowed a bit in the short-term as far as smoothed sunspot number, solar flux, and sunspots with solar flares in all classes. This is a normal cycle.

According to wiki we are now 3 1/2 years into Cycle 24, and even NASA's own AGW enthusiasts now acknowledge that Cycle 24 is going to be the smallest in more than 100 years. This is not a "normal" cycle by either recent or long-term standards.


Cycles are about 11 years long.

So saying "Smallest in 100 years" is like saying "coldest Jun 17th in 9 years"

Interesting, but not all that statistically important.
 
2011-06-17 06:07:22 PM

HAMMERTOE: So, correlation doesn't mean causation. Who'd have thunk it? I mean, all these volcanoes erupting, spewing an assload more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere than all the cars put together, but they obviously have nothing to do with it, (because politics is useless against a volcano.)


Carbon dioxide is not the only thing that volcanoes are spewing into the atmosphere. Among other things, it adds a lot of crap to both the troposphere and the stratosphere. I did some research work last summer on satellite data of constituents (and other properties) of the stratosphere. We had to completely dis-include a lot of data from around the eruption of Mt. Pinatubo because some of the values had gotten to the point where the data from a certain level (and anywhere below that level, height-wise) was bad. And even then, looking at plots of the data, you could tell that there was a massive affect, just on the stratosphere, even, by just one volcano. Also, on the whole, volcanoes cause more cooling than they do warming. These things are all known by the climatological/meteorological community. Correlation is not causation, of course, but when you understand that certain things are *known* to affect the atmosphere a certain way - eg, carbon dioxide is a green house gas, which will reflect infrared radiation that is being thrown off by the Earth right back at the Earth; on Venus, there is a runaway greenhouse affect, which is why the temperature is so much higher there than it is here - and there is a correlation on a larger scale with the data, then there is a much more high likelihood that it is more than a simple coincidence. This is even more likely the case when there is correlation occurring more than once between two items that are known to affect each other.

And, perhaps, just maybe, it is a good idea to stop depleting our resources now, while we still have them, not just because of climate change or global warming or whatever, but because it is a good idea. All resources are essentially finite, especially with oil and coal and natural gas and the like, at least until we can synthesize them or start shiatting them or something. So, we will run out, most likely. Also, isn't it just a good idea to make where we live the best that it can be? As an asthmatic, I would love for pollution to be decreased just for the reason that it would be significantly easier for me to breathe (between October and February anyway). So even if you want to hate on the climatological reason for decreasing our carbon dioxide output and minimizing the other pollutants we put into our environments, perhaps you should realize that there are other reasons, too. And, you should also try using that squishy thing between your ears once in a while, it's really quite fun.
 
2011-06-17 06:08:19 PM
You don't know shiat.
 
2011-06-17 06:10:37 PM

mtylerjr: Cycles are about 11 years long.

So saying "Smallest in 100 years" is like saying "coldest Jun 17th in 9 years"


No, it isn't like saying that at all. Nine Jun 17th's is 9 data points, which as you say is interesting, but not important. In contrast, 9 solar cycles is 9 SETS of data, each with about 4000 data points. Entirely different kettle of fish.
 
2011-06-17 06:15:57 PM
Well, at least he's sure there will be Global Warming and not anything but that.


Ugh, Church of Scientific Intolerance at it's best.
 
2011-06-17 06:17:54 PM
Fear is far easier than science.
 
2011-06-17 06:43:17 PM
www.smbc-comics.com
 
2011-06-17 06:45:13 PM

chaddsfarkprefect: Well, at least he's sure there will be Global Warming and not anything but that.


Ugh, Church of Scientific Intolerance at it's best.


Global warming has happened, is happening and will continue to happen until we stop dumping CO2 into the atmosphere. It's really a very simple concept.
 
2011-06-17 06:47:52 PM

Man On Pink Corner:
True, and I can hardly wait until we start forcibly rewiring multi-trillion dollar economies based on things we "aren't sure about."

Here's an idea: let's wait until we're sure.



Why step on the brakes until you actually hit something, right?

We might end up making this a cleaner world for us to live in for no reason at all!
 
2011-06-17 06:49:43 PM

Delawheredad: Short version of the article and just as accurate: There IS a link between sun spots and climate but NO ONE has as yet figured out the exact mechanism.


Svensmark has proposed that cosmic rays cause water vapor to condensate and form clouds.(SKY and CLOUD experiments CERN) Sunspot activity disrupts the amount of cosmic rays hitting the earth. More sunspots=less cosmic rays hitting earth=less clouds= more photons hitting earth = more infrared rays to collide with co2= more forcing from anthropogenic co2


If the sunspots are low in activity, more cosmic rays reach the earth and more clouds can be formed if correct conditions are met. Nir Shaviv has also proposed a theory of the spiral arms of our galaxy modulating the amount of cosmic radiation the planets recieve.

Old news, really
 
2011-06-17 06:57:18 PM

Jacob Singer: "...the execrable Daily Mail..."

LOL


Harsh..Not incorrect, but harsh...
 
2011-06-17 07:00:02 PM
i liked the idea of freezing to death better than sizzling to death.
 
2011-06-17 07:08:20 PM

Psumek: And people like Gore chided us for global warming not being a good thing. In 20 years when it's like late September weather and I'm burning a few tires on my lawn...who will be laughing then?

/me probably from the inhalation induced brain damage


As any online discussion of global warming grows longer, the probability of wharrgarbl about AAAAAAAALLLLLLLL GOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRRRRE! approaches 1.
 
2011-06-17 07:10:22 PM

Stone Meadow: rockradio1: Cycle 24 was a but slow in starting but the average for the very first year of a cycle is just that, up and down like like a rubber ball until the cycle is in full swing, usually close to the end of a cycle's second year. The uptick of the current cycle started well but had slowed a bit in the short-term as far as smoothed sunspot number, solar flux, and sunspots with solar flares in all classes. This is a normal cycle.

According to wiki we are now 3 1/2 years into Cycle 24, and even NASA's own AGW enthusiasts now acknowledge that Cycle 24 is going to be the smallest in more than 100 years. This is not a "normal" cycle by either recent or long-term standards.


THIS

Warmers ignore anything that dosen't feed their confirmation bias. They don't want to be wrong. Nobody does. But they should really stop and check the facts about their beliefs. Some new conflicts of interest have been revealed in the last IPCC report. Yet again another NGO has injected it's grey literature into the report and thanks to the same NGO's scientist being slected for the IPCC review, the outlier study was selected as the highlight. The press ran with story and never fact checked the report in any way. And it was unsupported by any data. Pure fabrication.

LOL
Greenpeace FTW on that one
 
2011-06-17 07:17:43 PM

colon_pow: i liked the idea of freezing to death better than sizzling to death.


Word. You can always put on more clothes. You can only take off so much.

I don't really disagree with the concept of reducing pollution and making this a better planet to live on. What I object to is the political ignorance of the fact that more people = more carbon footprints. The U.S. "exporting success" to the third world countries has only exacerbated the problem, all for the benefit of a few uber-rich people. The whole concept of "Reproductive Rights" combines with this ideology to assure mutual destruction in the future.
 
Displayed 50 of 109 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report