Thread: The Sun

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 26
  1. #11  
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    3,852
    Quote Originally Posted by Articulate_Ape View Post
    Yet the "consensus" is that man warms the Earth more than the primary source of all energy in our solar system.
    This sentence doesn't even make sense, since it is still the sun that warms the planet, even when we talk about global warming. CO2 just keeps more of the sun's energy in the atmosphere. The heat that we generate ourselves doesn't contribute anything significant to the global climate. Global warming is, quite literally, all about the sun.

    And we have a pretty good idea how solar variation has contributed to the temperature trends in recent history, and it cannot account for the increased warming - so far, only an increase in the greenhouse effect can.

    So the consensus is that solar variation cannot account for all of the warming in the 20th century, not that "man warms the planet more then the sun" (whatever that gibberish phrase is supposed to mean).

    They obviously aren't as interested in the Sun as they are in tenure and grant money.
    Yea, because grant money goes straight into those scientists' pockets .. combined with their cushy academia salary (yea, right), they're all living the high life on your dime! Or not... academia is the place you go, if money is not your ambition.
    Last edited by wilbur; 04-25-2010 at 03:04 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #12  
    Sonnabend
    Guest
    Wilbur

    What are your scientific qualifications?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #13  
    Senior Ape Articulate_Ape's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    NJ, Exit Only
    Posts
    7,977
    Quote Originally Posted by wilbur View Post
    This sentence doesn't even make sense, since it is still the sun that warms the planet, even when we talk about global warming. CO2 just keeps more of the sun's energy in the atmosphere. The heat that we generate ourselves doesn't contribute anything significant to the global climate. Global warming is, quite literally, all about the sun.

    And we have a pretty good idea how solar variation has contributed to the temperature trends in recent history, and it cannot account for the increased warming - so far, only an increase in the greenhouse effect can.

    So the consensus is that solar variation cannot account for all of the warming in the 20th century, not that "man warms the planet more then the sun" (whatever that gibberish phrase is supposed to mean).



    Yea, because grant money goes straight into those scientists' pockets .. combined with their cushy academia salary (yea, right), they're all living the high life on your dime! Or not... academia is the place you go, if money is not your ambition.


    Do you know what the neat thing about reality is, Wilbur? It happens. Reality is happening and the Earth is cooling. Volcanoes, earthquakes. show the planet is alive and well and regulating itself. You and your equally arrogant pals on the Left may think mankind can change the planet, but you are dreaming. If and when Earth grows weary of us, it need only shrug and we will be gone forever.
    "The efforts of the government alone will never be enough. In the end the people must choose and the people must help themselves" ~ JFK; from his famous inauguration speech (What Democrats sounded like before today's neo-Liberals hijacked that party)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #14  
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    3,852
    Quote Originally Posted by Articulate_Ape View Post
    Do you know what the neat thing about reality is, Wilbur? It happens. Reality is happening and the Earth is cooling.
    You're basing this off what?

    Volcanoes, earthquakes. show the planet is alive and well and regulating itself. You and your equally arrogant pals
    I really do try not to be arrogant sometimes, but its kinda hard when someone says:

    "Volcanoes and earthquakes, therefore no global warming!"

    Cmon...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #15  
    PORCUS MAXIMUS Rockntractor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    oklahoma
    Posts
    42,440
    Quote Originally Posted by wilbur View Post
    You're basing this off what?



    I really do try not to be arrogant sometimes, but its kinda hard when someone says:

    "Volcanoes and earthquakes, therefore no global warming!"

    Cmon...
    Wilbur if you want it to be warmer that bad just turn up your thermostat!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #16  
    Power CUer FlaGator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    The Swamps of N. Florida
    Posts
    22,377
    Quote Originally Posted by wilbur View Post
    This just goes to show how naive you guys really are here - what on Earth would convince you that climate scientists unilaterally rule out the effects of the Sun on our global temperature? You, here, by yourself, sitting in your chair at home, had the brilliant idea to think about the sun, and believe that all the worlds climate scientists simply overlooked it?

    Solar Variation is a huge area of interest in climate science.
    So are you now saying that the sun is responsible for the recent warming and not warming trends as of late?

    I believe in Christianity as I believe that the sun has risen: not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else.
    C. S. Lewis
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #17  
    Senior Ape Articulate_Ape's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    NJ, Exit Only
    Posts
    7,977
    Quote Originally Posted by wilbur View Post
    You're basing this off what?

    Empirical evidence, Wilbur. Scientists whose tenure and living is on the line hardly trump what is actually happening. They can say "The emperor's new clothes look great" to get their paychecks, but the rest of us with no vested interest can see the emperor's balls; and they ain't pretty.
    "The efforts of the government alone will never be enough. In the end the people must choose and the people must help themselves" ~ JFK; from his famous inauguration speech (What Democrats sounded like before today's neo-Liberals hijacked that party)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #18  
    Sonnabend
    Guest
    Wilbur

    What are your scientific qualifications
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #19  
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    3,852
    Quote Originally Posted by FlaGator View Post
    So are you now saying that the sun is responsible for the recent warming and not warming trends as of late?
    I'm not sure what you meant to say here... but I am saying that climate scientists, when investigating climate trends, absolutely do take into account solar variance.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #20  
    Power CUer FlaGator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    The Swamps of N. Florida
    Posts
    22,377
    I thought this was interesting...

    The case against AGW: Pluto's atmosphere


    According to NASA, Hubble telescopic images of the Kuiper Belt Object (formerly planet) Pluto showed marked atmospheric increase between 1994 and 2003:

    "The data reveal an icy molasses-colored world with a surprising amount of activity. Buie compared Hubble images taken in 1994 vs. 2003 and discovered that Pluto's northern hemisphere has brightened while the southern hemisphere has dimmed. Ground-based observations suggest that Pluto's atmosphere doubled in mass during approximately the same time period. And no one is certain what's causing the molasses-colored splotches on Pluto's surface."

    Now, why would the Plutonian atmosphere double? Solar driven global warming.

    Granted, Pluto's year is 249 Earth years long, and it reached perihelion (closest approach to the Sun) September 5, 1989 (due to it's rather eccentric, or elongated, orbit Pluto was closer to the Sun than Neptune between 1979 and 1999) and so Pluto has been receiving more solar radiation, but it is interesting to note that Earth's temperature peaked during the same time period. A doubling of the Plutonian atmosphere during this same period clearly illustrates a warmer planetoid, in contradiction to what we have been told by climate alarmists. The claim that the Sun has little to do with planetary temperatures is clearly false when one considers the case of Pluto, at any rate.

    It is also interesting to note that the atmospheric doubling occurred AFTER Pluto moved out beyond the orbit of Neptune; if this is purely seasonal, would not we have witnessed the thaw occurring BEFORE perihelion?

    Either the Sun has minimal influence on planetary temperatures, or is a primary forcing. Pluto, like Mars, and Jupiter and Neptune's moon Triton, suggests (along with common sense, that oft-neglected commodity) that the role of the Sun is being seriously neglected by advocates of anthropogenic global warming theory.

    Perhaps one or two worlds exhibiting warming trends could be explained as coincidence, but too many coincidences form a pattern. But too much has been invested in the AGW theory to allow an inconvenient truth to stand in the way. This latest analysis of Pluto speaks volumes.
    Story found here

    I believe in Christianity as I believe that the sun has risen: not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else.
    C. S. Lewis
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •