Look at What NASA (and others) Have to Say

[rushmc 23]

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/09/solar_winds_cooling_warmist_do.html

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2008/23sep_solarwind.htm?list1010788


http://wattsupwiththat.com/2007/10/17/earths-albedo-tells-a-interesting-story/

"September 24, 2008
Solar Winds Cooling Warmist Doomsaying
Timothy Birdnow
Global warming alarmists face yet another challenge to their predictions of an inferno of doom. The solar wind is losing power, and is at a fifty year low, according to NASA.


The Ulysses solar probe reports a 13% drop in temperature, a 20% drop in density, and a 30% drop-off in the sun`s magnetic field, marking this as the weakest period of solar wind on record (records go back to the 1960`s).


What does this mean? The Heliosphere is thinning, and thus will block fewer cosmic rays. Heinrick Svensmark theorizes that an increase in cosmic rays reaching the Earth will drive cloud formation, increase the planet`s albedo, thus cooling it.


Is this the cause of the Earth`s unusually cool year? According to Anthony Watts, the Earth`s albedo reached a nadir in 1997, and has risen sharply since. Is this related to the weakening of solar activity? We`ve seen few sunspots in Solar Cycle 24, the solar conveyor belt has slowed to a crawl, and now the solar wind is bottoming out.


This will allow us to see if we are really in the throes of Anthropogenic Global Warming; if temperatures rise (and they haven`t since 1998) then factors other than solar activity are driving climate trends, if not then the greenhouse gas theory is falsified.


If a cooling trend continues, the climate alarmists will have to throw in the towel. Never fear; they`ll come up with a new cause to keep their adrenaline flowing! Probably ocean acidification, or the loss of bees..."

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[labrys 0]

Don't forget frogs... what happened to all the frogs?

Do you have any original thoughts to share or are you going to continue to regurgitate links to things other people say / links that everyone else already has access to?

Owned by Remi #?

[lawrocket 3]

This is interesting, especially the part where the sciemtist saod that we can't say what the solar wind has been in the past because the data doesn't exist. I like the honesty of thois approach, which is opposite of the "this is unprecedented" we heard with regard to the possible circumnavigation of the north pole.

I guess NASA isn't as serious about fear as I thought.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

This is interesting, especially the part where the sciemtist saod that we can't say what the solar wind has been in the past because the data doesn't exist. I like the honesty of thois approach, which is opposite of the "this is unprecedented" we heard with regard to the possible circumnavigation of the north pole.

I guess NASA isn't as serious about fear as I thought.

It has to do with the amount of historical data available. Scientists have orders of magnitude more temperature data available than the have solar wind data.

I noticed that the scientists at NASA didn't try to use the observations as the latest reason of the moment to deny anthropogenic global warming, unlike the bloggers from the other links.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[lawrocket 3]

So scientists are supposed to reveal data and not interpret it. It is what the NASA article did - revealed it. No interpretations of what it means.

Gotcha. So a scientist would reveal results of a study showing increased concentrations of CO2 and not make any interpretations of the possible or probable effects of the finding.

What does a decreased solar wind mean? I've heard one explanation,

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[kallend 2,150]

Quote

This is interesting, especially the part where the sciemtist saod that we can't say what the solar wind has been in the past because the data doesn't exist. I like the honesty of thois approach, which is opposite of the "this is unprecedented" we heard with regard to the possible circumnavigation of the north pole.

I guess NASA isn't as serious about fear as I thought.

Here's a challenge for you. Go out in your yard and measure the temperature. Next measure the solar wind.

Were the measurements equally easy?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

What does a decreased solar wind mean? I've heard one explanation,

I don't know. I'll wait until scientists offer an explanation. What I do know is that the blogger who claimed that temps have decreased since 1998 is incorrect, which leads me to question the credibility of any other claims he made.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[lawrocket 3]

I lack the capability to measure the solar wind. Thatd be like saying, "lawrocket - go out in you backyard and measure the temperature and then measure the CO2 concentration."

I can't do both. I actually cannot do either right now.

[Hr]

Now, there may be a correlation between solar wind intensity and earth temperature. Perhaps the solar wind level was at a 500 year low around the year 1800 or so. Or it may have been at a 1000 year high at that time.

We don't know. But we can hypothesize and the solar wind seems to be of some significance.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[lawrocket 3]

So we are warmer now than at any time since 1850? 1950?

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[JackC 0]

Quote

So scientists are supposed to reveal data and not interpret it. It is what the NASA article did - revealed it. No interpretations of what it means.

Gotcha. So a scientist would reveal results of a study showing increased concentrations of CO2 and not make any interpretations of the possible or probable effects of the finding.

What does a decreased solar wind mean? I've heard one explanation,

Science is not like stamp collecting, they don't just collect data, they interpret it too. But neither would science jump to conclusions like the blog article did. NASA would not make the statement "if temperatures rise then factors other than solar activity are driving climate trends, if not then the greenhouse gas theory is falsified" because it is a gross oversimplification and as such it is plain wrong.

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

So we are warmer now than at any time since 1850? 1950?

It's a little early in the thread to be setting up straw men, don't you think? My post simply implied that 1998 was not the warmest year of the past decade.

If you want temperature data, it is available via a Google search, or alternately, I think nerdgirl has posted such data in a previous GW thread in SC. I would be surprised if billvon has not also posted such data.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[lawrocket 3]

I understand that. But the NASA document seemed neat in terms of its honesty and forthrightness. It is the kind of thing I trust because it is free from salesmanship.

That was my point. I trust that kind of thing more. I know that is just me.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

I understand that. But the NASA document seemed neat in terms of its honesty and forthrightness. It is the kind of thing I trust because it is free from salesmanship.

Agreed. The blog entries, on the other hand, lacked such honesty and forthrightness, which is why I don't consider them to be credible.

Quote

That was my point. I trust that kind of thing more. I know that is just me.

I also trust that kind of thing more. That's why I trust scientists and peer reviewed research over politicians and rhetoric.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Don't forget frogs... what happened to all the frogs?

Do you have any original thoughts to share or are you going to continue to regurgitate links to things other people say / links that everyone else already has access to?

So sorry you feel threatened

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

Quote

This is interesting, especially the part where the sciemtist saod that we can't say what the solar wind has been in the past because the data doesn't exist. I like the honesty of thois approach, which is opposite of the "this is unprecedented" we heard with regard to the possible circumnavigation of the north pole.

I guess NASA isn't as serious about fear as I thought.

There was some opinoin and some info.

I made no comment and the first reply is of the asshat type.

Go figure.

I read these and some is hard for me to understand. Go info with some questions. As it should be

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kallend 2,150]

Quote

Quote

This is interesting, especially the part where the sciemtist saod that we can't say what the solar wind has been in the past because the data doesn't exist. I like the honesty of thois approach, which is opposite of the "this is unprecedented" we heard with regard to the possible circumnavigation of the north pole.

I guess NASA isn't as serious about fear as I thought.

There was some opinoin and some info.

I made no comment

if temperatures rise (and they haven`t since 1998)...

Wasn't the bold part yours, then? Surely he copied that from you.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[billvon 3,120]

>Wasn't the bold part yours, then?

No, he didn't say that, and will defend to the death his right to not say it or post it. Don't go accusing him of saying things he said.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Quote

This is interesting, especially the part where the sciemtist saod that we can't say what the solar wind has been in the past because the data doesn't exist. I like the honesty of thois approach, which is opposite of the "this is unprecedented" we heard with regard to the possible circumnavigation of the north pole.

I guess NASA isn't as serious about fear as I thought.

There was some opinoin and some info.

I made no comment

if temperatures rise (and they haven`t since 1998)...

Wasn't the bold part yours, then? Surely he copied that from you.

Surely he did
And yes the bolding was mine

Just for you
Now you have another change to put out a lie and feel good about it

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

Quote

>Wasn't the bold part yours, then?

No, he didn't say that, and will defend to the death his right to not say it or post it. Don't go accusing him of saying things he said.

Now you need to get in on a lie yet again

I am starting to feel sorry for you and your parnoid comment

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kallend 2,150]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

This is interesting, especially the part where the sciemtist saod that we can't say what the solar wind has been in the past because the data doesn't exist. I like the honesty of thois approach, which is opposite of the "this is unprecedented" we heard with regard to the possible circumnavigation of the north pole.

I guess NASA isn't as serious about fear as I thought.

There was some opinoin and some info.

I made no comment

if temperatures rise (and they haven`t since 1998)...

Wasn't the bold part yours, then? Surely he copied that from you.

Surely he did
And yes the bolding was mine

Just for you
Now you have another change to put out a lie and feel good about it

No need, you already did it for me.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[labrys 0]

Quote

So sorry you feel threatened

And I'm equally as sorry that you feel embarrased. by my post.

Owned by Remi #?

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

So sorry you feel threatened

And I'm equally as sorry that you feel embarrased. by my post.

Not at all
If I had been embarassed I may have felt the need to insult.
You know, Like you did

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

This is interesting, especially the part where the sciemtist saod that we can't say what the solar wind has been in the past because the data doesn't exist. I like the honesty of thois approach, which is opposite of the "this is unprecedented" we heard with regard to the possible circumnavigation of the north pole.

I guess NASA isn't as serious about fear as I thought.

There was some opinoin and some info.

I made no comment

if temperatures rise (and they haven`t since 1998)...

Wasn't the bold part yours, then? Surely he copied that from you.

Surely he did
And yes the bolding was mine

Just for you
Now you have another change to put out a lie and feel good about it

No need, you already did it for me.

Caught in yet another lie sir. Must be hard for you to get caught so often.

Now, every time I see the word "liar" or "lie" in one of your posts I can only think

kettle? pot, kettle? pot

Oh, and by the way, did you happen to bring up the link I provided? No? hmmmm, maybe your should



You may want to read the part where I said the "bolding" was mine, not the words

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[jakee 1,596]

Quote

So scientists are supposed to reveal data and not interpret it.

Eh? Who the hell do you think should be interpreting data if not scientists?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[kallend 2,150]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

This is interesting, especially the part where the sciemtist saod that we can't say what the solar wind has been in the past because the data doesn't exist. I like the honesty of thois approach, which is opposite of the "this is unprecedented" we heard with regard to the possible circumnavigation of the north pole.

I guess NASA isn't as serious about fear as I thought.

There was some opinoin and some info.

I made no comment

if temperatures rise (and they haven`t since 1998)...

Wasn't the bold part yours, then? Surely he copied that from you.

Surely he did
And yes the bolding was mine

Just for you
Now you have another change to put out a lie and feel good about it

No need, you already did it for me.

Caught in yet another lie sir. Must be hard for you to get caught so often.

Now, every time I see the word "liar" or "lie" in one of your posts I can only think

kettle? pot, kettle? pot

Oh, and by the way, did you happen to bring up the link I provided? No? hmmmm, maybe your should



You may want to read the part where I said the "bolding" was mine, not the words

Indeed!

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.