Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
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:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
New Solar Science Raises Climate Questions, Triggers Attacks
Topic Started: Aug 13 2016, 12:47 PM (277 Views)
Pat
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Brewster
Aug 13 2016, 02:33 PM
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:

Posted Image

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.
According to the report, it was scientists doing the research. What is considered a competent scientist? I label that moving the goal posts Brew.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Brewster
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Pat
Aug 14 2016, 01:23 AM
According to the report, it was scientists doing the research. What is considered a competent scientist? I label that moving the goal posts Brew.
It was a scientist doing the research, and it was a reasonable paper. But it was never backed up by any other scientist in the field after being out there for about a decade - a pretty good indication that she was wrong.

But it's not her paper that's the real problem, it's the Whacko interpretation applied to it by GWPF.

Pat, why the trouble understanding what a "competent scientist" is? It's someone trained in a field, preferably to the PhD level, and who has worked in that field for a significant time. In this case, dealing with a paper about the Sun, that would be an astronomer. And not a single astronomer anywhere has backed up her paper.

But regardless of whether her paper is correct or not about the Sun's fluctuations, it indicates nothing about Climate Change - it can't. She's not a competent expert in the field of Climate Science - no training, no experience.

And that's where GWPF comes in - they've taken an "iffy" paper with little scientific confirmation, stressed her purely amateur opinion on how it will affect the Earth's temperature, and broadcast it to the world, with not a single competent climate scientist's verification. And they expect their Gullible audience to accept this over-hyped, unscientific mishmash as reason to doubt 120 years of climate research.

In any case, No goalposts moved.

My insistence that all papers be written or at least reviewed (Preferably both) by a competent expert in his/her field, then Peer Reviewed if it falls outside commonly accepted theories, has been exactly the same since I joined this board.

Let's review this document. Her original document needed to be:

written by a competent expert in his/her field; True
preferably reviewed by another competent expert in his/her field; False
Peer Reviewed if it falls outside commonly accepted theories; False

This piece passed only the first of those grounds.

GWPF's later interpretation of her paper fails on ALL of those grounds. Totally False
Edited by Brewster, Aug 14 2016, 02:22 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Berton
Member Avatar
Thunder Fan
[ * ]
What in the world are you talking about Brewster? This is a new paper. You need to get out of history and get caught up with what is happening today.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Brewster
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Bullship. I first debunked it before this Forum even existed.

On Edit: Pardon me, not quite true... I apologize.

I just checked - this Forum was created in 2008, and the study was first published in 2010..

I didn't start posting here regularly until 2011, hence the confusion.

Zharkova may have issued updates since then, making it seem like a whole new discovery, but it's the same ol' speculative nonsense in shiny new clothes.
Edited by Brewster, Aug 14 2016, 06:15 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Neutral
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
doglaugh I wonder if we get to see the "proof" of that statement.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Brewster
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Proof?

I checked again, and yes she's dressed it up, added some bits, but here's the original Article:

Quote:
 
Diagnostics of energetic electrons with anisotropic distributions in solar flares. I. Hard X-rays bremsstrahlung emission

V. V. Zharkova · A. A. Kuznetsov · T. V. Siversky

Full-text Article · Mar 2010 · Astronomy and Astrophysics
Edited by Brewster, Aug 14 2016, 06:25 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Neutral
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
So you lied again. Thanks for admitting it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Brewster
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
i made a mistake. I always admit my mistakes.

Now when will you start admitting either your mistakes Or your lies, Neut?

Either would be an improvement.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Neutral
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]

I checked again, and yes she's dressed it up, added some bits, but here's the original Article:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Berton
Member Avatar
Thunder Fan
[ * ]
Brewster
Aug 14 2016, 07:02 AM
i made a mistake. I always admit my mistakes.

Now when will you start admitting either your mistakes Or your lies, Neut?

Either would be an improvement.

You made the same "mistake" three times in this thread. That is not a mistake, that is lack of knowledge and the inability to look at both sides of the argument.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Free Forums. Reliable service with over 8 years of experience.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Fire And Ice General Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Website Traffic Analysis