• 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!

Indirect Effects of the Sun on Earth's Climate[W:376]

Threegoofs said:
Learn first, then post.

The Gospel According to John | DiscoverMagazine.com

And Christy sure writes a lot for the Cornwall Allosnce for not being a part of it...

John Christy, Ph.D., | Cornwall Alliance
Click to expand...
Swing and a miss, they posted only 3 articles and all 3 are excerpts or reprints from Wall Street Journal and Baptist Standard. So Christy doesnt write exclusively for Cornwall Alliance.

Furthermore nowhere in those articles does Christy say Jesus will save the planet from global warming and pollution. In fact, he says the complete opposite and I quote:

Please understand, we should not waste energy and the resources needed to produce this life-enhancing gift of creation. We should not destroy whole environments in its pursuit, as we now see most dramatically in the poorest countries where forest wood is devoured for low-grade fuel. I believe we will solve the energy issue with scientific research—and an optimistic heart—without increasing human suffering
Click to expand...

So you see, he believes science in the end will solve the energy crisis, not Jesus coming in on the clouds.

Next time you post a link you might wanna try actually reading some of them
 
Desert Storm said:
Swing and a miss, they posted only 3 articles and all 3 are excerpts or reprints from Wall Street Journal and Baptist Standard. So Christy doesnt write exclusively for Cornwall Alliance.

Furthermore nowhere in those articles does Christy say Jesus will save the planet from global warming and pollution. In fact, he says the complete opposite and I quote:



So you see, he believes science in the end will solve the energy crisis, not Jesus coming in on the clouds.

Next time you post a link you might wanna try actually reading some of them
Click to expand...

Whatever.

I can show you the evidence, but I can’t learn it for you.
 
Threegoofs said:
Whatever.

I can show you the evidence
Click to expand...
Then show it please. You have yet to back up your assertion that Christy believes Jesus will solve earth's pollution and global warming problem, in fact the link you posted proves the exact opposite.

Also from this link he believes in evolution and less so in creationism, so he's not one of those crazy Fundies who believe earth is only 6,000 years old and Jesus walked on water:

The Gospel According to John | DiscoverMagazine.com

They know Christy as a dedicated member of the church and a mellow-toned bass in its choir. Some of them know he's a scientist, and some may even know that he puts more faith in evolution as an explanatory theory than in creationism
Click to expand...
 
Jack Hays said:
Already posted in #220. It's a nothingburger.
Click to expand...

You were given a link.
Were you expecting something on-point and an indication of understanding of what was in it?
Has that ever happened with that character?
 
Desert Storm said:
Swing and a miss, they posted only 3 articles and all 3 are excerpts or reprints from Wall Street Journal and Baptist Standard. So Christy doesnt write exclusively for Cornwall Alliance.

Furthermore nowhere in those articles does Christy say Jesus will save the planet from global warming and pollution. In fact, he says the complete opposite and I quote:



So you see, he believes science in the end will solve the energy crisis, not Jesus coming in on the clouds.

Next time you post a link you might wanna try actually reading some of them
Click to expand...
What I find interesting about Christy's comment,
"I believe we will solve the energy issue with scientific research—and an optimistic heart—without increasing human suffering "
is that he identified the correct problem.
We do not really have a CO2 problem, we have an energy problem!
We simply do not have enough organic hydrocarbons in the ground, to allow all the people alive
to achieve a first world lifestyle, if they want it.
 
Jack Hays said:
Cosmic Rays and Climate | ScienceBits


By: Nir J. Shaviv

Article originally appeared in PhysicaPlus.

Sir William Herschel was the first to seriously consider the sun as a source of climate variations, already two centuries ago. He noted a correlation between the price of wheat, which he presumed to be a climate proxy, and the sunspot activity:


“The result of this review of the foregoing five periods is, that, from the price of wheat, it seems probable that some temporary scarcity or defect of vegetation has generally taken place, when the sun has been without those appearances which we surmise to be symptoms of a copious emission of light and heat.”
​
​
​

— Sir William Herschel, Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. London, 91, 265 (1801)
​

Herschel presumed that this link arises from variation in the luminosity of the sun. Today, various solar activity and climate variations are indeed known to have a notable correlation on various time scales. The best example is perhaps the one depicted in fig. 1, on a centennial to millennial time scale between solar activity and the tropical climate of the Indian ocean (Neff et al. 2001). Another example of a beautiful correlation exists on a somewhat longer time scale, between solar activity and the northern atlantic climate (Bond et al. 2001). Nevertheless, the relatively small luminosity variations of the sun are most likely insufficient to explain this or other links. Thus, an amplifier of solar activity is probably required to explain these observed correlations. . . .
Click to expand...

That particular subject and various related studies remain unknown by lay alarmists and they intend to keep it that way.
When you think about it, they would be the flat-earthers.
 

[h=1]The sun is blank, NASA data shows it to be dimming[/h]As the sun gets successively more blank with each day, due to lack of sunspots, it is also dimming. According to data from NASA’s Spaceweather, so far in 2017, 96 days (27%) of the days observing the sun have been without sunspots. Here is the view today from the NASA Solar Dynamics Observatory satellite: Today at…
Continue reading →
 
What I still don't understand, is how all the so-called experts can ignore the indirect effects.

The long term variation of TSI alone is over 0.2%. Since the suns energy drives the other radiative forcing like the greenhouse effect, the forcing these too have increased by over 0.2% since 1713. With a total backforce from the troposphere to surface of almost 500 W/m^2, around 1 W/m^2 of this is due to the sun.

About 2/3rds of the surface is ocean. This is not blackbody or greybody type warming. This is direct radiative warming below the surface, so changes are a linear response instead of the nonlinear 4th power response. The 0.2% number for ocean warning is also more like 0.4%, because of the way the spectra changes with changes in luminosity. (Refer to Plank's law.) Almost all changes are in the shortwave region, which is nearly fully absorbed by only deeper waters, because water is transparent to this spectra. A simple 0.2% change only changes the solid surface heat by around 0.05% because it mostly follows formulas found in black body calculations.

So... Solar changes affect the ocean by around 200% of change. Greenhouse gas warming is about equal. Land warming is only about 1/4th.

All the papers I have read on this topic only calculate the 1/4th, ignoring the other two factors.
 
Desert Storm said:
I can assure everyone, no global warming in Toronto so far this winter :shock:

https://www.theweathernetwork.com/ca/alerts/high-alert/ontario/toronto
Click to expand...

Yuk, yuk! Global warming must not exist! It’s winter!

Take that libs!

Oh, wait...

ae2e14255b18d2e400c1b1a68956836a.jpg
 
[h=3]Why Low Sunspot Activity Portends Prolonged Climate Chill[/h]https://www.newsmax.com › Home › Larry Bell



Jan 8, 2018 - Henrik Svensmark and colleague Nir Shaviv report that their new study results directly contradict all-too popularly accepted theoretical numerical model projections that small aerosols are lost before they are capable of growing large enough to produce clouds. As evidence demonstrated in a cloud chamber ...
 
Jack Hays said:
[h=3]Why Low Sunspot Activity Portends Prolonged Climate Chill[/h]https://www.newsmax.com › Home › Larry Bell



Jan 8, 2018 - Henrik Svensmark and colleague Nir Shaviv report that their new study results directly contradict all-too popularly accepted theoretical numerical model projections that small aerosols are lost before they are capable of growing large enough to produce clouds. As evidence demonstrated in a cloud chamber ...
Click to expand...

LOL.

Newsmax.

Sounds about right.
 
Threegoofs said:
LOL.

Newsmax.

Sounds about right.
Click to expand...

Larry Bell is an endowed professor of space architecture at the University of Houston where he founded the Sasakawa International Center for Space Architecture (SICSA) and the graduate program in space architecture. He is the author of "Scared Witless: Prophets and Profits of Climate Doom" (2015) and "Climate of Corruption: Politics and Power Behind the Global Warming Hoax"


 
Jack Hays said:
Larry Bell is an endowed professor of space architecture at the University of Houston where he founded the Sasakawa International Center for Space Architecture (SICSA) and the graduate program in space architecture. He is the author of "Scared Witless: Prophets and Profits of Climate Doom" (2015) and "Climate of Corruption: Politics and Power Behind the Global Warming Hoax"
Click to expand...

And.. it’s from Newsmax.

NewsMax.com - SourceWatch

Gotta wonder how this ends up in a thinking persons web browser...
 
Jack Hays said:
The negative result of your narrow, blinkered outlook is well known.
Click to expand...

That's the down side. On the plus side it does save time and effort that would normally be spent learning about a subject before drawing a conclusion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom