96% of US NOAA Weather Stations Sited Wrong, Inflate Temperature Record
(www.heartland.org)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (44)
sorted by:
Polar Bear numbers are up. Weather temps are only up because there's more concrete and less trees. The global temps aren't rising at any alarming rate, they fluctuate all the time, and I am tired of the bullshit. Hell, right now, the sun is effecting our climate more than pollution can. That bitch is at the beginning of a bad cycle and things are going to be worse before they get better in 10 years.
All the asphalt as well, that stuff soaks up and radiates heat like crazy.
Which effects rain storms by producing heat updrafts. Like in the desert.
You would think that after all these predictions being wrong that they would stop. Sadly there are so many gullible young ppl virtue signaling about climate change
Global temperatures have risen at a dramatic rate over the past 100 years, it's no where near that erratic, and yeah, polar bear numbers are up, specifically because of climate change, which has caused warmer temperatures to give Polar Bears more habitable environments with richer food supplies.
That's the difference between watermelon environmental activism and actual climate science:
And no, the sun's activity is not having a significant effect on temperature as the actual luminosity we are receiving hasn't really changed to a statistical margin, and even if it did the angle of the light has a more dramatic impact then the slight diming of one spot on a rotating gas ball 93 million miles away.
Imagine a burning gas station. Imagine you are stairing at it from 10 miles away. Now imagine a bird that is 20 feet in front of the gas station flies past your line of sight. Will you feel any cooler? No, of course you won't. the temporary minor reduction in infrared radiation will be almost impossible to notice. That's the reason why sunspots and luminosity really don't fucking mean much.
Man, sometimes your posts are good but you have an insane blind spot on global cool... warm... err, climate change. The goddamn Sun is nothing like watching a fire from 10 miles away, as can easily be observed by literally anyone who has ever stepped into sunlight from a shade. Get out of the basement, holy shit.
It's not a blind spot. Studying how Climates and energy work make this whole thing a very simple issue.
Do you know what my Environmental Science class in University?
Watched "An Inconvient Truth".
Do you know why?
To absolutely tear it to shreds for being alarmist, bullshit, hysteria that was objectively, factually, wrong. Including Al Gore's argument that Global Warming had saved the world from Global Cooling, but only for a while.
Watermelons aren't scientists, they are Communists wearing yet another skin suit. Stop taking them seriously as academicians. If someone in a lab coat tells you "Sex is a Social Construct" you know that they are a Communist subverter. Now you need to see that this is true when they are wearing a lab coat and telling you "the Earth will die in 12 years."
Why do you think my example includes a bird in front of the gas station , rather than a box truck stopping 2 feet in front of you. Like a bird flying past a gas station 10 miles away from you, a sunspot doesn't decrease luminosity enough to effect you or the radiant heat you recieve. A box truck in front of you can block all direct sunlight. You are re-iterating my point.
Put it another way, there are geo-engineers (crazy people with PHDs in Engineering) that want to blot out the fucking sun to decrease temperatures. They basically need to create a fucking Stellaris Megastructure to reduce enough light and radiation to decrease the temperature by somewhere around 3-5 degrees. It would literally be pre-cursor to a Dyson Sphere, the largest thing ever constructed in human history, would bankrupt every national government, and would require many many mining operations on asteroids to source the metal, and all of that for a drop by couple degrees. A sunspot isn't even almost enough to cause the same level of luminosity drop that such a megastructure would create. ... but that is what is being argued that sunspots are capable of.
Can you recommend any non hysterical environmentalists?
Dude, the climate people literally say, "uh the 0.3% variance caused by solar cycles (which we fully don't understand) couldn't contribute to warming" but then claim that a smaller percentage of forcing caused by green house gases caused the warming because of positive feedbacks. I wonder how the feedbacks know which increase in radiance is caused by the sun and which by green house gases.
"Climate people" say a lot of horse shit. It's like a "health science advocate" or "science communicator" telling you that the science has concluded that the MRNA vaccines are safe and effective.
But just like real fucking doctors, talking about real medicine, use real science; real climate science also exists. Watermelons are not the science. They are using it as a skin suit.
Sun spots? Are you fucking high? It's the sun's output which effects are atmosphere I'm talking about.
I've seen the argument for years.
What naturally occurring could cause the sun to drop in luminosity enough to cause a reaction in global temperatures, particularly in a cyclical manner every couple hundred years: sun spot activity.
Thing is, the math doesn't work out, and the level of sun spot activity doesn't correlate well enough to the rise in temperatures, and doesn't really have a good mechanism of which to do so, since the angle of the radiation is far more dramatic (and is what causes the seasons to change).
The sun's electrical output, for lack of a better scientific term because my brain is fried, it's the solar winds type shit that if powerful enough, fries electronics, interacts with our atmosphere. This changes the composition of it, if nowhere else, then at the poles. You get more activity and radiant energy, heats things up. A slight change in the poles changes weather patterns in a domino effect. Electrical activity, dust particles, heat sinks, all of this in the various layers changes things like oxygen and moisture levels. It's all very minor, but adds up over time. Throw in ocean temps, less ground cover, natural fluctuations, and blah blah blah, weather soup.
False, the Heartland data shows a rise of 2 deg per century which is nothing, not the 10 degrees that you and the IPCC(CP) shill for.
Nice strawman, and a useless metaphor to boot.
No one said anywhere that it is the sun's luminescence that matters. It's the 22 year magnetic cycle that changes the amount and energy of cosmic and solar radiation impacting the Earth's atmosphere, thus changing the cloud formation rates and altitudes.
2 degrees per century is way faster than the average, and the actually disruptive results come from 5 degrees, not 10. The average is significantly less than 1 degree per century, and it's not a linear increase, but a fluctuation. You never see an entire millennia of .5 degree increases in average temperature every century. To see the past 150 years have the largest and fastest rate of change in temperature ever recorded in human history is pretty fucking alarming.
The planet doesn't seem to have a temperature change that dramatic without getting hit by a fucking mile wide asteroid.
Yes they have for the past decade. That's why so many were harping on "Sun Spot Activity" for so many years. It was literally the predominant anti-anthropogenic argument made as of only a few years ago. You can probably find some Bill O'Riley clips about it.
That's actually even more silly. We have a magnetosphere for reason. The number of muon particles hitting the atmosphere isn't going to do shit. Changing the composition of your atmosphere by introducing massive amounts of carbon dioxide... does.
Based on what data? We've only been "accurately" measuring temperatures globally for a little over one century
The Holocene is a natural heating phase. We exited the Pleistocene about 10 thousand years ago, were moving into proper Holocene, the earth will hear up with or without humanity and considering volcanos can dum more cO2 into the atmosphere than the entire industrialized world, that is just the way shit be. Eventually the Holocene will end and the next Pleistocene will begin as it has for millions of years. It is not the sun, it's geological.
I don't disagree with your assessment over 10,000 years, and the slow increase in temperatures there in. I'm just saying lets not pretend that humans didn't have anything to do with the crazy jump in temperatures over the past 0.015% of that.