During 2006, the Sun’s “Conveyor Belt” was the slowest and fastest on record – at the same time.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- NASA Sea Level
- “getting smaller”
- “Permanent Shift” In Antarctic Sea Ice
- Rapidly Accelerating Sea Level Rise
- Technology Advances
- “The Hour Of Decision”
- “fair & equitable”
- Michael Mann Continues His War
- Time Travelling Satellites
- Time Traveling Satellites
- Adult Content On X
- The Climate Of 1923
- Arctic Report Card
- Green Colorado
- Hottest Summer Ever
- “Sea ice could be gone by 2012, scientists warn”
- Record CO2 Growth
- Walz’s For Trump
- 6,000 Year Old Tree In The Austrian Alps
- Gemini Can See The Future
- Clinton To Defeat Trump By Double Digits
- Climate Intelligence Means “Making Things Up”
- Comedy From The BBC
- The Climate Afterlife
- Rewriting The Northern Hemisphere
Recent Comments
- Allan Shelton on NASA Sea Level
- Disillusioned on “Permanent Shift” In Antarctic Sea Ice
- Ulric Lyons on Technology Advances
- oeman50 on NASA Sea Level
- Gordon Vigurs on NASA Sea Level
- Lasse on NASA Sea Level
- Scott Allen on “getting smaller”
- Greg in NZ on NASA Sea Level
- arn on “getting smaller”
- Gordon Vigurs on “fair & equitable”
I don’t know how or where you find all these things…
…but keep it up!
But 2006 and 2010 didn’t happen “at the same time”.
Find “for the past 5 years” above… Science is in the details.
For all those non-scientists, and “experts” as well, who can’t look a truth in the eye and focus upon it for more than a minute, you should say explicitly what this means: The solar “experts” don’t know what they are talking about, especially when they are talking to the public. This has been obvious to me for the last two or three years–remember how cycle 24’s weakness was such a big surprise to them. I made the following comment on the Hockeyschtick site on March 7, 2011 (I don’t have a link to the page on me at the moment):
“Let’s see now: We have scientists using computer simulations (don’t tell me — it’s a GSCM, a grand solar circulation model) as if they were sure their model behaved like the real physical system, and apparent basic contradiction between the model and independent observations. Are we sure these are not climate scientists, pretending to be solar physicists? (I wouldn’t put it past them, at this point.)”
So, as I keep saying from time to time, it’s not just climate science that’s bad now. It is across the board of modern physical science. (Sociology, too–with its “post-normal” cant.)
Understanding the sun and how it affects the Earth is so new that NASA knows as much as anyone. The only advantage NASA has is that it has the instruments to look at the sun. But all the data is being processed by everyone. NASA doesn’t know more than anyone else in that regard, and might know less than some.
Not that I would ever defend the liars at NASA, but the first article is from 2006, the second one from 2010.
And if you read the highlighted first line of the 2010 article and do the math, you might re-consider your “defense”.
And what is 2010 minus five?
gotchya. 🙂
Reblogged this on The Firewall.
Just like everything else in Liberal Pseudo-Science; look at the most recent cherry-picked short-term dataset, ignore/delete/alter prior data within the same dataset, extrapolate recent cherry-picked data infinitely, advocate for global socioeconomic fundamental transformation based on cherry-picked dataset extrapolated to infinity conclusion, claim more funding is needed for further study even though conclusion already reached.
Here’s another example…
http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/JCLI3587.1
“It is quite possible that the large changes initiated by
the gradual winter warming and the atmospheric circu-
lation anomalies of the early 1990s have forced the sys-
tem into a new state in which very large extents of
summer open water and winter first-year ice are the
norm. The old regime may not be regained until there
is either a prolonged cooling period or a prolonged
period of very negative AO index and positive PDO
index that can once again build the reservoir of thick
ridged ice through strengthening the circulation of the
Beaufort gyre. The gradually increasing winter air tem-
peratures may reflect a global warming signal that will
preclude a return to the old regime.”
Now, what happened in the early 1990’s the author of this paper referenced? An eight year long period of abnormally positive Arctic Oscillation. This was the new climate regime tipping point, dontcha know, during the early and mid 2000’s. A strong arctic vortex and stronger jet streams fueling bigger, wetter, more destructive storms. And as the author says this WEATHER pattern “may reflect a global warming signal that will preclude a return to the old regime.” That was the CONCLUSION of the scientific study.
Fast forward to today and what has now become the rallying cry for solid evidence for the global warming signal? Well, strongly negative Arctic Oscillation, weaker jet stream, Just ask Jennifer Francis, she’ll tell you so.
So, global warming causes positive AO (and helps maintain it) was the leading conclusion as recently as 2008. All it took was several periods of strongly negative AO to completely flip the entire field of climate science on its head. Again; look at the most recent cherry-picked short-term dataset, ignore/delete/alter prior data within the same dataset, extrapolate recent cherry-picked data infinitely, advocate for global socioeconomic fundamental transformation based on cherry-picked dataset extrapolated to infinity conclusion, claim more funding is needed for further study even though conclusion already reached.
I should add, Steve, you should copy that PDF and save it somewhere because just like every other past scientific study which contradicts The Inquisition, it somehow gets deleted from posterity.
And to you Joe Romm-types and other drone repeaters of scientific nonsense: Don’t believe it? Try finding the GISS V1 GLOBAL dataset somewhere. Or V2, for that matter. We Have already seen how corrupted the US dataset is between the virgin version and the tramped out version GISS pimps out now. It would be enlightening to see how much of a madame the global dataset is.
We’re missing the point here, I think. It’s not ‘solar’ cycles, it’s ‘funding’ cycles. 😛
Seems Government pays out lots of money at solar minimums but like in 2008 and cuts funding at peaks but solar cycle #24 is a dud so the debt bubble continue for friends of the political syctem
Slowing causing Accelerating.
Entirely consistent with Warming causing Cooling.
It’s the new scientific paradigm!
To be fair, the two differing opinions are from different scientists in two different scientific agencies….
Oh wait! Ah never mind 🙂
Past few solar cycles #24 lowest and tracking cycle #5 like a clone, #5 was in late 1700’s.
https://mobile.twitter.com/NJSnowFan/status/364525798520139776/photo/1
NASA new video from today, no mention how low cycle #24 has been.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=34gNgaME86Y&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Luckily we have REAL scientists and engineers constructing satellites, but we have complete boneheads poking at the resulting data, making the effort almost completely worthless.. until those boneheads are replaced by the scientists and engineers that constructed the satellite.