Source: Author: Date: Click:
30 years of global cooling? Solar cycle 23 is going to be about 13 years long. The longest since 1790. it’s been known by solar scientist that the longer the solar cycle the weaker in amplitude of the next 2 solar cycles. Solar cycle 24 is going to be very weak. Solar Cycle 24 and 25 should take us up to 2030. The weak amplitude of solar cycles 24 and 25 will likely cool the globe for 30 years. The earth as already cooled over the past 2 years and is likely to accelerate over the coming years. China as already seen their coldest winter for 100 years. Sydney has seen their first snowfall for decades.
As when the earth cools the temperature gradient increases between the poles and the equator. This will make the jet stream increase its speed from west to east. Britain’s autumn and winters will become milder, maritime in the short term. When the temperature gradient continue to increase between the poles and the equator the jet-stream becomes unstable and more likely to break up in to anticyclone blocking and cyclones. The anticyclone blocking will develop from Siberia to Iceland bringing in months of polar continental air to the UK in winter
The CO2 is to weak of a greenhouse gas to stop natural cooling. As when the oceans cools it will absorb all of the manmade CO2 and a large amount of natural CO2
Ice cores show temperature go up first then CO2 follows
The evidence supporting the manmade global warming hypothesis is getting less and less. There is a large amount of jobs and government tax dependent on the manmade global warming hypothesis so there will be allot of political spin in the data.
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2008/...
http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2008...

http://eteam.ncpa.org/commentaries/calif...

http://www.futurepundit.com/archives/005...

I also agree with Dr. Jello -- the science is already corrupted by politics and funding grants.

Edit-- and for you thumbs down folks--
http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=467...

http://www.greentreegazette.com/articles...

http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/05/g...

http://www.cnsnews.com/VIEWNATION.ASP?PA...

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/reprin...

Shall I post a few more-- ???

News article at:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6290228.st...

and many more, such as

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/arc...

People promoting it have been caught messing around with the data:

Pattern of Strange Errors Plagues Solar Activity and Terrestrial Climate Data, Eos,Vol. 85, No. 39, 28 September 2004

Boatman1 - I%26#039;m still having a hard time with the sources you use. American Thinker? Clearly a bunch of right wing radicals. Thoughtful conservatives are annoyed at them giving conservatives a bad name for ignoring science:

%26quot;Former Republican House Speaker Newt Gingrich challenged fellow conservatives to stop resisting scientific evidence of global warming%26quot;

%26quot;National Review (the most prestigious conservative magazine) published a cover story calling on conservatives to shake off denial and get into the climate policy debate%26quot;

I find it hard to believe you don%26#039;t have more credible sources available to you. Including real scientists that you know from your Astronomy work.
http://www.physorg.com/news75818795.html
http://sesfoundation.org/dalton_minimum....
http://ff.org/centers/csspp/library/co2w...
http://www.worldclimatereport.com/index....
http://www.warwickhughes.com/agri/Solar_...
http://landscheidt.auditblogs.com/archiv...
[TOP] [Close]
Slide Show
ADVERTISEMENT