Sunspot Numbers - Solar Max - Solar Min

There are so many factors that interact, no one knows for sure. The Sun's effect on cloud formation may point to less cloud cover meaning more heat lost to space. Ive never been concerned about a tipping point for runaway heat. On the other hand we don't know what triggered the ice ages. Was it the Sun? Was it something involved in the Sun's orbit around the galactic center? Is there a correlation with prehistoric patterns?

The Sun takes 225 to 240 million years to make a complete orbit. Are there regions where asteroids are more likely to strike our planet? I found a book which tabulates the known large asteroid strikes. There's far more than commonly known. The nickel deposits in Canada are due to a large asteroid. While we're listening to the moaning and groaning over CO2, is our solar system approaching a region in our galaxy where asteroids are going to smack us like a swatter smacking flies?

That doesn't inspire confidence in data collected and miscollected in 100 years. It's not difficult to miss the forest for the trees. All we know for sure is when ice covers the northern US again, the population is going to be severely pruned.

If we're going to survive as a species we need to understand the long term impacts on climate. The orchestrated hullabaloo over CO2 is a waste of time. If we were able to predict future ice ages from the past, that would be a godsend. I think that's a far better focus for scientists. That won't happen because the funding behind the CO2 scam won't pay for something that doesn't make money or increase power.

Unless there's a widespread consensus in an immediate threat, the funding for research won't be there. That's why AGW has been so aggressively marketed. We've been hit with everything including polar bears to convince us the world thremostat is stuck on maximum heat. The scientists that believe otherwise can't get a word in edgewise with the ongoing media panic.

Not really sure I understand what you are trying to say, but it seems that you want to imply a universal inability of recording climate data.

Perhaps, if this is where you are trying to go, you could expand on this.

Perhaps you could point to specific examples that support your claim (well, actually, if you could bring ANY data that supports ANY of your claims....).

In the mean time, how are we going to maintain the 'crop land' we have when all those alphabet agency's like the EPA put out demands for the Ford's and Chev one ton trucks to get 100mpg . . ??

With my PV & wind system I can survive for a while if / when the grid is down . . .
But to take away our already short 'growing' season would put the big hurt on us all.

Actually, that's not even in question.



Here is the basic fact: In over a hundred years of research - research that brings forward evidence from thousands of years of geological events - nothing has been brought to the table that substantively contradicts the basic findings:


There is very high confidence that the net effect of human activities since 1750 has been one of warming.[6] {2.2}

Most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic GHG concentrations.[7] It is likely that there has been significant anthropogenic warming over the past 50 years averaged over each continent (except Antarctica) (Figure SPM.4). {2.4}

During the past 50 years, the sum of solar and volcanic forcings would likely have produced cooling. Observed patterns of warming and their changes are simulated only by models that include anthropogenic forcings. Difficulties remain in simulating and attributing observed temperature changes at smaller than continental scales. {2.4}

Causes of change: Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report - Summary for Policy Makers


As exemplified by




Human and Natural Drivers of Climate Change - AR4 WGI Summary for Policymakers

I can't believe you've never heard of asteroid strikes, Roberte. Asteroid strikes, unlike CO2, are known causes of mass extinction events. Here's a list of the top ten. There's many more. The ones on the list are just the largest known. I found the estimated times of strikes interesting. Anything close to 225 to 240 million years ago or a multiple means our solar system may be approaching a hazardous region in space.

Top 10 Largest Impact Structures on Earth

Between variations in the Sun's activity and our orbit around the galactic center, I suspect there's a very real threat out there.

I am wondering....What was the hottest day ever recorded?
I do believe it was a time when MOST Americans were still using horse and plows: Sep. 13 1922
The Auto industry was just getting started.
Global Warming is a fraud and future tax for tree huggers, nothing more.
Oh, and before you ask my source, look it up yourself, Grasshopper.

Got it. We don't need to act on our profligate burning of fossil fuels and the well documented effects that is having on our climate.

Because....wait for it....



We MIGHT get hit by an asteroid.....


Got it.


And people complained of "fear mongering" and the topic going off-topic....


And we still see no evidence being brought forward by those attempting to deny the basic science:



Here is the basic fact: In over a hundred years of research - research that brings forward evidence from thousands of years of geological events - nothing has been brought to the table that substantively contradicts the basic findings:


There is very high confidence that the net effect of human activities since 1750 has been one of warming.[6] {2.2}

Most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic GHG concentrations.[7] It is likely that there has been significant anthropogenic warming over the past 50 years averaged over each continent (except Antarctica) (Figure SPM.4). {2.4}

During the past 50 years, the sum of solar and volcanic forcings would likely have produced cooling. Observed patterns of warming and their changes are simulated only by models that include anthropogenic forcings. Difficulties remain in simulating and attributing observed temperature changes at smaller than continental scales. {2.4}

Causes of change: Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report - Summary for Policy Makers


As exemplified by




Human and Natural Drivers of Climate Change - AR4 WGI Summary for Policymakers

AGW is a waste of time and money. If we're going to impose another tax, direct or indirect, on people let's do it to support getting off the planet. Otherwise our clock as a species is running out. We're a one trick poney in many ways. And we're sitting ducks for the next mass extinction event. Diversions like AGW waste resources that could be better utilized to study real issues.

God isn't going to show up and stop an ice age or asteroid. Meanwhile people are panicking over plant food. Whiile you want to argue about who's controling the thermostat, I'm more concerned about the bigger picture. It doesn't do much good to play with the thermostat when the house is in immediate danger from far more hazardous natural events.

If you truly "got it" you'd be concerned about something more than an imaginary thermostat. I have to LMAO over people wringing their hands over our profligate use of fossil fuels while we have a nuclear reaction going on in our planetary neighborhood that warms the Earth far more.

That is for sure.
And gosh isn't nice that planet HAS warmed UP since the little ice age? LOL
It would still be pretty COLD if it hadn't.
The earth is in constant change whether man is on it one not. And the Sun and other factors have a direct bearing on that change. From the tilt of the Earth to the Cycle of sun spots. But no where do the GW guru's even mention those facts. And the amount of volcanic eruptions that happen all the over the world, including many many at the ocean depths, that has to change the water temps over time also. But not one thing of the Real Facts ever get mentioned. Hmmm That wounld't fit into the GW agenda folks that want to different governments to CONTROL its people.

Got it.


And people complained of "fear mongering" and the topic going off-topic....



And still no science to support any of the claims.

I noticed how Roberte ignored my post...That was temperature taken in the shade, BTW. Sep. 13 1922...Hottest day ever, PRE-global warming era.

Roberte, are you denying we've had cyclical ice ages and asteroid strikes? Are you denying as a species we're confined o one planet?

Yep! Does he eventually buzz off or does he continue to not understand? The man is a marketer's dream.

Actually.... Well covered:

TS.2.4 Radiative Forcing Due to Solar Activity and Volcanic Eruptions
Continuous monitoring of total solar irradiance now covers the last 28 years. The data show a well-established 11-year cycle in irradiance that varies by 0.08% from solar cycle minima to maxima, with no significant long-term trend. New data have more accurately quantified changes in solar spectral fluxes over a broad range of wavelengths in association with changing solar activity. Improved calibrations using high-quality overlapping measurements have also contributed to a better understanding. Current understanding of solar physics and the known sources of irradiance variability suggest comparable irradiance levels during the past two solar cycles, including at solar minima. The primary known cause of contemporary irradiance variability is the presence on the Sun’s disk of sunspots (compact, dark features where radiation is locally depleted) and faculae (extended bright features where radiation is locally enhanced). {2.7}

The estimated direct radiative forcing due to changes in the solar output since 1750 is +0.12 [+0.06 to +0.3] W m–2, which is less than half of the estimate given in the TAR, with a low level of scientific understanding. The reduced radiative forcing estimate comes from a re-evaluation of the long-term change in solar irradiance since 1610 (the Maunder Minimum) based upon: a new reconstruction using a model of solar magnetic flux variations that does not invoke geomagnetic, cosmogenic or stellar proxies; improved understanding of recent solar variations and their relationship to physical processes; and re-evaluation of the variations of Sun-like stars. While this leads to an elevation in the level of scientific understanding from very low in the TAR to low in this assessment, uncertainties remain large because of the lack of direct observations and incomplete understanding of solar variability mechanisms over long time scales. {2.7, 6.6}

Empirical associations have been reported between solar-modulated cosmic ray ionization of the atmosphere and global average low-level cloud cover but evidence for a systematic indirect solar effect remains ambiguous. It has been suggested that galactic cosmic rays with sufficient energy to reach the troposphere could alter the population of cloud condensation nuclei and hence microphysical cloud properties (droplet number and concentration), inducing changes in cloud processes analogous to the indirect cloud albedo effect of tropospheric aerosols and thus causing an indirect solar forcing of climate. Studies have probed various correlations with clouds in particular regions or using limited cloud types or limited time periods; however, the cosmic ray time series does not appear to correspond to global total cloud cover after 1991 or to global low-level cloud cover after 1994. Together with the lack of a proven physical mechanism and the plausibility of other causal factors affecting changes in cloud cover, this makes the association between galactic cosmic ray-induced changes in aerosol and cloud formation controversial. {2.7}

Explosive volcanic eruptions greatly increase the concentration of stratospheric sulphate aerosols. A single eruption can thereby cool global mean climate for a few years. Volcanic aerosols perturb both the stratosphere and surface/troposphere radiative energy budgets and climate in an episodic manner, and many past events are evident in ice core observations of sulphate as well as temperature records. There have been no explosive volcanic events since the 1991 Mt. Pinatubo eruption capable of injecting significant material to the stratosphere. However, the potential exists for volcanic eruptions much larger than the 1991 Mt. Pinatubo eruption, which could produce larger radiative forcing and longer-term cooling of the climate system. {2.7, 6.4, 6.6, 9.2}

TS.2.4 Radiative Forcing Due to Solar Activity and Volcanic Eruptions - AR4 WGI Technical Summary

and shown in this chart:




Human and Natural Drivers of Climate Change - AR4 WGI Summary for Policymakers

Weather is not climate.

Thats the best you can do?
The hottest day on record is not climate?
seriously?

cli·mate (klmt)
n.
1. The meteorological conditions, including temperature, precipitation, and wind, that characteristically prevail in a particular region.
2. A region of the earth having particular meteorological conditions: lives in a cold climate.
3. A prevailing condition or set of attitudes in human affairs: a climate of unrest.

I think you better go back to school, instead being a puppet to the global warming frauds.

Thought that my hard drive had turned into a vinyl record .... remember them skipping and finding yourself listening to the same tune over and over?

Whew! Good morning Roberte!

__________________
Going hungry ain't much of a plan

That is all they got is to repeat, rest, repeat, rest, repeat some more roderick, cause they will never listen to the reel facts in the natter these GW folks a agenda all by themselves and facts and the truth and long over time time data be darned, as the earth has changed so many times over time, their charts are "computer generated falsehood and that ois a fact they don't want to beleive that anything like that happens. Well it Does. Garbage IN Garbage out, in this case Garbage out means they want to it LOOK like what they are trying to preach, but it is wrong and that is also fact.

I guess they never was told, that it is better to be quiet, and be thought a fool, than open ones mouth and confirm such, arabian knight

YA repeat lies enough and even they believe it is true.
Hmmmm What about those pictures of Open water that was taken awhile ago, the GW SEE look at that NO MORE ice.
Till REAL Scientists were there directly where the picture had been taken, and Ice and more ice was there No Open water at all~!!
Well Low AND behold the satellite was taking Pictures in the WRONG area from where the GW people thought they were taken~!!!!
LOL That was so funny the GW folks were stumbling all over themselves in order to get back on track But Pictures and being there were two different things, and now how could they make up the lies that the GW was still happening. But they still keep on trying. LOL
There is so much info out there to debunk any and ALL the data these GW folks "think" is true it isn't even funny.