• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Are We Headed to a New Solar Minimum?

Finally had some time to look over Jack Hayes' latest cut and paste job.

The first link is from Judith Curry and is pretty typical of her easily misunderstood propaganda. Did anyone notice that she never actually says that a solar minimum means that the planet is going to start cooling? Nope! But the scientific illiterates and/or dishonest types like Longview automatically start talking like a new grand minimum means global cooling. Sorry you guys... but the science just doesn't really support this belief.

Then Jack's second link is to more of Jo Nova's out right lies and misinformation. And the biggest lie is about the Potsdam Institute predicting a coming ice age. Of course she links to a NoTricksZone link with a whole bunch more lies and misinformation. Who then links to a German site... who links to a Austrian weather site. None of them actually link to anything from the Potsdam Institute. This is a dead give away that they are likely not telling the truth. So I went and did some searching and found a 2010 study done by 1 or 2 Potsdam scientists that directly addresses this issue. Turns out that this study never predicts a coming ice age. And actually says that the cooling from a grand minimum like the Maunder minimum would come no where close to offsetting the warming due to greenhouse gases.

Here is a graph from SkepticalScience.com that illustrates what this study really found:

19688122142_6b1489f823_b.jpg


Found that here in This article that explains the subject quite well.

Then there was Jack's third link to a guest post on WUWT by David Archibald. Whats funny is the the article says absolutely nothing about global cooling. And after a quick reading the only thing wrong with it is that it incorrectly states that sunspot numbers haven't been this low in 200 years. But what is even more funny is that David Archibald is the author of a completely embarrassing prediction of rapid cooling based on low solar activity he made back in 2008. Go to the first graph on page 21 to see his prediction. It is no wonder he didn't say a thing about cooling this time.

Hey Jack... when are going to stop spamming this forum with denialist BS??
 
Buzz said:
Finally had some time to look over Jack Hayes' latest cut and paste job.

The first link is from Judith Curry and is pretty typical of her easily misunderstood propaganda. Did anyone notice that she never actually says that a solar minimum means that the planet is going to start cooling? Nope! But the scientific illiterates and/or dishonest types like Longview automatically start talking like a new grand minimum means global cooling. Sorry you guys... but the science just doesn't really support this belief.

Then Jack's second link is to more of Jo Nova's out right lies and misinformation. And the biggest lie is about the Potsdam Institute predicting a coming ice age. Of course she links to a NoTricksZone link with a whole bunch more lies and misinformation. Who then links to a German site... who links to a Austrian weather site. None of them actually link to anything from the Potsdam Institute. This is a dead give away that they are likely not telling the truth. So I went and did some searching and found a 2010 study done by 1 or 2 Potsdam scientists that directly addresses this issue. Turns out that this study never predicts a coming ice age. And actually says that the cooling from a grand minimum like the Maunder minimum would come no where close to offsetting the warming due to greenhouse gases.

Here is a graph from SkepticalScience.com that illustrates what this study really found:

19688122142_6b1489f823_b.jpg


Found that here in This article that explains the subject quite well.

Then there was Jack's third link to a guest post on WUWT by David Archibald. Whats funny is the the article says absolutely nothing about global cooling. And after a quick reading the only thing wrong with it is that it incorrectly states that sunspot numbers haven't been this low in 200 years. But what is even more funny is that David Archibald is the author of a completely embarrassing prediction of rapid cooling based on low solar activity he made back in 2008. Go to the first graph on page 21 to see his prediction. It is no wonder he didn't say a thing about cooling this time.

Hey Jack... when are going to stop spamming this forum with denialist BS??
Click to expand...

You are correct that Judith Curry never claims a solar minimum = global cooling. The rest of your post is therefore irrelevant and/or incoherent. As for your accusation concerning the JoNova link, please note this from the NoTricksZone link: "The Berliner Kurier reports that the PIK scientists foresee a weakening of the sun’s activity over the coming years. “That means that conversely it is going to get colder. The scientists are speaking of a little ice age.”According to the PIK scientists, the reduced solar activity will, however, not be able to stop the global warming and only brake the warming up to 2100 by 0.3°C."

As for the third link, David Archibald doesn't say anything about global cooling because he was not writing about global cooling. You are debating yourself.
 
Last edited:
Buzz said:
Finally had some time to look over Jack Hayes' latest cut and paste job.

The first link is from Judith Curry and is pretty typical of her easily misunderstood propaganda. Did anyone notice that she never actually says that a solar minimum means that the planet is going to start cooling? Nope! But the scientific illiterates and/or dishonest types like Longview automatically start talking like a new grand minimum means global cooling. Sorry you guys... but the science just doesn't really support this belief.

Then Jack's second link is to more of Jo Nova's out right lies and misinformation. And the biggest lie is about the Potsdam Institute predicting a coming ice age. Of course she links to a NoTricksZone link with a whole bunch more lies and misinformation. Who then links to a German site... who links to a Austrian weather site. None of them actually link to anything from the Potsdam Institute. This is a dead give away that they are likely not telling the truth. So I went and did some searching and found a 2010 study done by 1 or 2 Potsdam scientists that directly addresses this issue. Turns out that this study never predicts a coming ice age. And actually says that the cooling from a grand minimum like the Maunder minimum would come no where close to offsetting the warming due to greenhouse gases.

Here is a graph from SkepticalScience.com that illustrates what this study really found:



Found that here in This article that explains the subject quite well.

Then there was Jack's third link to a guest post on WUWT by David Archibald. Whats funny is the the article says absolutely nothing about global cooling. And after a quick reading the only thing wrong with it is that it incorrectly states that sunspot numbers haven't been this low in 200 years. But what is even more funny is that David Archibald is the author of a completely embarrassing prediction of rapid cooling based on low solar activity he made back in 2008. Go to the first graph on page 21 to see his prediction. It is no wonder he didn't say a thing about cooling this time.

Hey Jack... when are going to stop spamming this forum with denialist BS??
Click to expand...

Around here, we call it:

69207518.jpg


Or alternatively, Bloggus Vomitus Wattus, Bloggus Jonovae Vomitus, or Bloggus Vomitus Irrelevanti.
 
Threegoofs said:
Around here, we call it:


Or alternatively, Bloggus Vomitus Wattus, Bloggus Jonovae Vomitus, or Bloggus Vomitus Irrelevanti.
Click to expand...

How unfortunate that you have aligned yourself with a post that is both conceptually misguided and factually incorrect.
 
Jack Hays said:
You are correct that Judith Curry never claims a solar minimum = global cooling. The rest of your post is therefore irrelevant and/or incoherent.
Click to expand...

Are you really saying that you can't comprehend that people like longview might mistake what Curry is saying and think she means the planet is going to begin cooling? Do you really think that longview was the only one to get mislead? And how would this be irrelevant?

Jack Hays said:
As for your accusation concerning the JoNova link, please note this from the NoTricksZone link: "The Berliner Kurier reports that the PIK scientists foresee a weakening of the sun’s activity over the coming years. “That means that conversely it is going to get colder. The scientists are speaking of a little ice age.”According to the PIK scientists, the reduced solar activity will, however, not be able to stop the global warming and only brake the warming up to 2100 by 0.3°C."
Click to expand...

One small bit of truth doesn't make up for the fact that they are lying about the Potsdam scientists saying that Europe is headed for a mini ice age. And it doesn't matter that someone else lied and Nova is just repeating that lie. If she wasn't so stupid or a dishonest hack she would have verified the info was true before posting it.

Jack Hays said:
As for the third link, David Archibald doesn't say anything about global cooling because he was not writing about global cooling. You are debating yourself.
Click to expand...

Oh... and I forgot to mention that Archibald provided a link at the end of his post to buy his book that predicts rapid global cooling.

Jack... does someone pay you to post all this Bloggus Denierii Vomitus?
 
Buzz said:
Are you really saying that you can't comprehend that people like longview might mistake what Curry is saying and think she means the planet is going to begin cooling? Do you really think that longview was the only one to get mislead? And how would this be irrelevant?



One small bit of truth doesn't make up for the fact that they are lying about the Potsdam scientists saying that Europe is headed for a mini ice age. And it doesn't matter that someone else lied and Nova is just repeating that lie. If she wasn't so stupid or a dishonest hack she would have verified the info was true before posting it.



Oh... and I forgot to mention that Archibald provided a link at the end of his post to buy his book that predicts rapid global cooling.

Jack... does someone pay you to post all this Bloggus Denierii Vomitus?
Click to expand...

Longview can speak for himself. He's pretty capable in my experience. I'm only responsible for my own posts.
There was no lie and JoNova was actually a model of integrity in presenting the full picture. If you weren't so full of irrational hate you could avoid such an obvious mischaracterization.
Archibald is free to link whatever he wants. The point was his post, which fit nicely in a solar minimum thread.
I suggest fewer temper tantrums and more thought are in order for you.
 
Threegoofs said:
Around here, we call it:

Or alternatively, Bloggus Vomitus Wattus, Bloggus Jonovae Vomitus, or Bloggus Vomitus Irrelevanti.
Click to expand...

Buzz said:
Jack... does someone pay you to post all this Bloggus Denierii Vomitus?
Click to expand...

Have you two been sending emails to Roy Spencer?




Saturday silliness – warmist blows a gasket

I get hate mail like this from time to time and I’m pretty certain I know who this one is from to Dr. Roy Spencer as it fits the speech and punctuation pattern of some emails I have received. This one is completely unhinged, but it is worth reviewing just so you can see how a true…
Continue reading →
 
Jack Hays said:
I'm only responsible for my own posts.
Click to expand...

No... your not responsible. That is the problem. You cut and paste stuff that is just not true and then when someone points this out you either deny or make up some lame excuse. I have yet to see you admit responsibility for any of your linked Bloggus Denierii Vomitus.


Jack Hays said:
There was no lie and JoNova was actually a model of integrity in presenting the full picture.
Click to expand...

Do you really believe that? Then show me where in that study does it say that Europe is headed for a little ice age.

Jack Hays said:
Archibald is free to link whatever he wants.
Click to expand...

Yeah... and he linked to more Bloggus Denierii Vomitus. Or should that be Bookkus Denierii Vomitus?
 
Buzz said:
No... your not responsible. That is the problem. You cut and paste stuff that is just not true and then when someone points this out you either deny or make up some lame excuse. I have yet to see you admit responsibility for any of your linked Bloggus Denierii Vomitus.




Do you really believe that? Then show me where in that study does it say that Europe is headed for a little ice age.



Yeah... and he linked to more Bloggus Denierii Vomitus. Or should that be Bookkus Denierii Vomitus?
Click to expand...

Sorry, but I respect the judgment of my fellow posters to draw their own conclusions.
It does not say in the study that Europe is headed to a Little Ice Age. I think it's clear that commentary comes from elsewhere.
Archibald's decisions on links are not of concern.
 
Jack Hays said:
Sorry, but I respect the judgment of my fellow posters to draw their own conclusions.
It does not say in the study that Europe is headed to a Little Ice Age. I think it's clear that commentary comes from elsewhere.
Archibald's decisions on links are not of concern.
Click to expand...

Thanks... for proving my last points.
 
Jack Hays said:
Happy to help . . . although I'm not sure you had any points, first or last.
Click to expand...

Not sure I had any points? Wow... you forget really fast don't you? Is this how you deal with the shame?
 
Buzz said:
Not sure I had any points? Wow... you forget really fast don't you? Is this how you deal with the shame?
Click to expand...

"Shame?" Really? Is that what you're going with? I am but a humble servant of the data. Like most committed warmists, you are uncomfortable with that. Professor Curry has written incisively on the dangers to science when practitioners become advocates. I recommend her to you.
 
Jack Hays said:
"Shame?" Really? Is that what you're going with? I am but a humble servant of the data. Like most committed warmists, you are uncomfortable with that. Professor Curry has written incisively on the dangers to science when practitioners become advocates. I recommend her to you.
Click to expand...

So... your recommending an advocate? Are you unaware that Curry hasn't had any new science published in several years?
 
 
O.K... That would count as 1 in the last 4+ years. Maybe there is more. Curry needs to up-date her list of publications.
 
You mean advocating denialism on her blog.
 
Buzz said:
You mean advocating denialism on her blog.
Click to expand...

On the contrary, she's a thorough AGW believer. She does not, however, believe scientists should be advocates or opposing views should be demonized.
 
Threegoofs said:
That's usually what happens when people can't do real science anymore.

There's a reason she's considered an embarrassment to the Earth Science community...and shilling for Heartland is only part of it.

Climate heretic: Judith Curry turns on her colleagues : Nature News
Click to expand...

From 2010? Really?:roll:

I was not aware that people who "can't do real science anymore" are published by Cambridge University.

Thank you for so clearly illustrating the dangers of science advocacy against which Curry has warned.
 
Jack Hays said:
On the contrary, she's a thorough AGW believer. She does not, however, believe scientists should be advocates or opposing views should be demonized.
Click to expand...

Then she should stop pushing information and writing confussing articles that are easily misinterpreted by the less informed. Like her article you cut and pasted in this thread that mislead longview.

Besides... Curry wasn't my main complaint. It was Nova that was really the most misleading.

Funny how you have steered this thread away from her pushing of denialist lies.
 
Buzz said:
Then she should stop pushing information and writing confussing articles that are easily misinterpreted by the less informed. Like her article you cut and pasted in this thread that mislead longview.

Besides... Curry wasn't my main complaint. It was Nova that was really the most misleading.

Funny how you have steered this thread away from her pushing of denialist lies.
Click to expand...

Nova's post was just fine. Curry is a light in darkness. You are afraid of data. Too bad.
 
Jack Hays said:
Nova's post was just fine. Curry is a light in darkness. You are afraid of data. Too bad.
Click to expand...

Light in the darkness. Revolutionary heroes like Svensmark.

You talk about this like a cult follower does.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom