| We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| New Solar Science Raises Climate Questions, Triggers Attacks | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Aug 13 2016, 12:47 PM (274 Views) | |
| Pat | Aug 13 2016, 12:47 PM Post #1 |
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I don't believe that we having a climate problem will ever be sold to the public or the scientific community as a whole, so long as some scientists stick their head in the sand and refuse to accept research that contradicts current assumptions. It sounds like we are headed for a mini ice age. http://www.thegwpf.com/new-solar-research-raises-climate-questions-triggers-attacks/ NEW SOLAR RESEARCH RAISES CLIMATE QUESTIONS, TRIGGERS ATTACKS Date: 09/08/16 Global Warming Policy Forum Recent research by Professor Valentina Zharkova (Northumbria University) and colleagues has shed new light on the inner workings of the Sun. If correct, this new discovery means that future solar cycles and variations in the Sun’s activity can be predicted more accurately. The research suggests that the next three solar cycles will see solar activity reduce significantly into the middle of the century, producing conditions similar to those last seen in the 1600s – during the Maunder Minimum. This may have implications for temperatures here on Earth. Future solar cycles will serve as a test of the astrophysicists’ work, but some climate scientists have not welcomed the research and even tried to suppress the new findings. New Solar Research Raises Climate Questions, Triggers Attacks To most of us the sun seems unchanging. But if you observe its surface, it is seething with vast explosions and ejections. This activity has its origin in intense magnetic fields generated by swirling currents in the sun’s outer layer – scientists call it the solar dynamo. It produces the well-known 11-year solar cycle which can be seen as sunspots come and go on the sun’s surface. But models of the solar dynamo have only been partially successful in predicting the solar cycle – and that might be because a vital component is missing. After studying full-disc images of the sun’s magnetic field, Professor Valentina Zharkova of Northumbria University and colleagues, discovered that the sun’s dynamo is actually made of two components – coming from different depths inside the sun. The interaction between these two magnetic waves either amplifies solar activity or damps it down. Professor Zharkova’s observations suggest we are due for a prolonged period of low solar activity. Professor Valentina Zharkova: We will see it from 2020 to 2053, when the three next cycles will be very reduced magnetic field of the sun. Basically what happens is these two waves, they separate into the opposite hemispheres and they will not be interacting with each other, which means that resulting magnetic field will drop dramatically nearly to zero. And this will be a similar conditions like in Maunder Minimum. What will happen to the Earth remains to be seen and predicted because nobody has developed any program or any models of terrestrial response – they are based on this period when the sun has maximum activity — when the sun has these nice fluctuations, and its magnetic field [is] very strong. But we’re approaching to the stage when the magnetic field of the sun is going to be very, very small. She suggests it could be a repeat of the so-called Maunder Minimum – a period in the 17th century with little solar activity that may have influenced a cooling on Earth. Whatever we do to the planet, if everything is done only by the sun, then the temperature should drop similar like it was in the Maunder Minimum. At least in the Northern hemisphere, where this temperature is well protocoled and written. We didn’t have many measurements in the Southern hemisphere, we don’t know what will happen with that, but in the Northern hemisphere, we know it’s very well protocoled. The rivers are frozen. There are winters and no summers, and so on. So we only hope because these Maunder Minima will be shorter, the Maunder Minimum of the 17th century was about 65 years, the Maunder Minimum which we expect will be lasting not longer than 30-35 years. Of course things are not the same as they were in the 17th century – we have a lot more greenhouse gas in the atmosphere. And it will be interesting to see how the terrestrial and the solar influences play out. This is promising research – a new insight into our sun with predictions as to its future behavior, yet Professor Zharkova relates than some climatologists resented her discovery. Professor Valentina Zharkova: Some of them were welcoming and discussing. But some of them were quite — I would say — pushy. They were trying to actually silence us. Some of them contacted the Royal Astronomical Society, demanding, behind our back, that they withdraw our press release. The Royal Astronomical Society replied to them and CCed to us and said, ‘Look, this is the work by the scientists who we support, please discuss this with them.’ We had about 8 or 10 exchanges by email, when I tried to prove my point, and I’m saying, I’m willing to look at what you do, I’m willing to see how our results we produced and what the sun has explained to us. So how this is transformed into climate we do not produce; we can only assume it should be. So we’re happy to work with you, and add to your data our results. So don’t take the sunspots which you get, we can give you our curve. Work with our curve. So they didn’t want to. Professor Zharkova’s work may have significantly improved our ability to forecast solar activity. If we do enter a new Maunder Minimum, then we are bound to discover new things about our sun and its influences on our climate. |
![]() |
|
| Brewster | Aug 13 2016, 02:33 PM Post #2 |
![]()
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The GWPF is a Climate Denial group based out of the UK, inspired by the biggest liar in the entire Denialist world, Lord Monckton, who has also cured Cancer and Aids, lied about being a sitting British Lord, designed an unsolvable math puzzle (solved in less than a week) and claims all Warmists are "Nazi"'s, out to create a One World Government. (Including a few 18 year old kids - apparently they get mean early these days.) Full Description of GWPF The "Mini Ice Age" predicted on Zarkova's "research" is nearly a decade old now, has never been confirmed by any competent scientist, and has been debunked many times, including right here on this forum. But let's pretend for a moment that THIS TIME she's correct - the fluctuations she proposes actually do exist, and DO reduce the Sun's output - what will happen? Absolutely nothing - we have generated so much Carbon in the atmosphere by now that we will simply overpower any change that has ever been measured or calculated in the last 3 billion years. In fact, the Sun IS cooling a the moment, (normal, well understood cycles) but it's having exactly ZERO effect on the climate - here's a graph: ![]() Note that the Sun's activity is dipping, but the Warming just carries on up like nothing changed. The Complete Rebuttle Pat, No Scientist is Sticking his/her Head in the Sand. Every angle, every concept, is checked and rechecked. With over 20,000 Climate Scientists of every belief and political stripe, every education and practical background, there is NO WAY a major piece has been missed. While there are small uncertainties in exact dating, precise changes in temperatures, speed of glacial melting, areas affected, sea levels, etc., the general understanding of the Science is BEYOND settled. There has not been a believable climate paper doubting the basic science in well over a decade. The only unknown factor is how long the Kochs and their big energy buddies will continue to finance phony groups like GWPF, WattsUpWithThat, Climate Depot, and all the others. Edited by Brewster, Aug 13 2016, 03:12 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Berton | Aug 13 2016, 07:31 PM Post #3 |
![]()
Thunder Fan
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
When you start using a source which is not politically motivated you might be more believable Brewster. |
![]() |
|
| colo_crawdad | Aug 13 2016, 08:50 PM Post #4 |
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
It seems to me that the primary reason for part of the public rejecting the facts of global warming and climate change is that the US Right has made warming a political rather than a scientific issue.
Edited by colo_crawdad, Aug 13 2016, 08:52 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Berton | Aug 13 2016, 09:16 PM Post #5 |
![]()
Thunder Fan
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
No, Gore is the one who made it a political issue. I think he is a dedicated left winger is he not? |
![]() |
|
| Fulltimer | Aug 13 2016, 10:15 PM Post #6 |
Member
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Solar cycles are independent of any impact our activities have on climate. The argument is spurious. It's like saying we can ignore emmision controls on vehicles because there is a coal burning power plant nearby. Ice ages are a natural cycle, but what we do is unnatural. It's bad enough if our own sun is trying to kill us without us doing it to ourselves. |
![]() |
|
| Fulltimer | Aug 13 2016, 10:21 PM Post #7 |
Member
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
You are correct, Gore did start the politics of this issue and be is no scientist. Personally I prefer to look at the science of it all in the framework of realizing that we pump a significant amount for crap into the atmosphere which has to have a significant impact. However it's a very complex science and there is bound to be controversy. Before believing anything, it's wise to look at credentials and other studies that back up any claim. Regardless, anyone with a brain can see rapid climate changes are happening, no matter what the cause, and we need to try and deal with them. If we can. And keep politics out of it. |
![]() |
|
| colo_crawdad | Aug 13 2016, 10:25 PM Post #8 |
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
No, it was the US Ri\ight”s attempt to carry out a smear campaign against Gore's candidacy that turned Climate change into a right\left political issue.
Edited by colo_crawdad, Aug 13 2016, 10:27 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Fulltimer | Aug 13 2016, 10:39 PM Post #9 |
Member
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Gore because he ran for president was not the best to raise public awareness of this subject. It was bound to bring a negative reaction from the right whether he was correct or not. |
![]() |
|
| Pat | Aug 14 2016, 01:23 AM Post #10 |
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
According to the report, it was scientists doing the research. What is considered a competent scientist? I label that moving the goal posts Brew. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Fire And Ice General Discussion · Next Topic » |





![]](http://z3.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)







9:02 AM Jul 11
