Posted on 12/17/2005 7:32:32 AM PST by Lonesome in Massachussets
Edited on 12/17/2005 8:31:35 AM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
DOH! Irrefutable proof that Global Warming is an ideology, not a scientific theory.
GREAT idea to post this!
I'd recomend hiding under the bed.
Am I the only one who doubts that we humans have been recording sunspot activity for 8000 years?
It's Bush's fault for not signing the Kyoto Protocol!
sunspots, not CO2...why we have any "global warming"
Global Warning! - time to hide under your beds!
SUV's cause sunspots.
Read the article. The claims are:
1.) Sunspot activity can be inferred from fossilized tree rings.
2.) Sunspot activity is at an 8000 year high.
3.) Sunspot activity correlates with increased solar output.
4.) Increased solar output does not necessarily affect global tempratures.
You lost me on that last one, Bunky.
Am I the only one who doubts you've read the article before posting? Hint: tree rings.
You beat me to it. Great minds...
The sunspots are Bush's fault. We know this because he is to blame for everything terrible. The sunspots are terrible. Bush's fault.
Yup! Bush at it again!
When in trouble or in doubt, run in circles scream and shout.
Hope they're aware of this at Stargate Command.
There is good reason to believe that increased levels of CO2 can cause an increase in global temprature. Whether or not the empirical evidence supports this hypothesis is an open question. Unfortunately, the global warming "theory" for most of its advocates is more of an ideology (See Karl Popper's observations on psychoanalysis in the Wipediea artilce on falifiability http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability ) than a scientific theory.
Eco-whacko Interpretation:
The data shows a clear correlation between temperature and sunspot activity, but because we aren't smart enough to understand the physical process and thereby show a direct cause-and-effect, we completely deny the correlation even exists.
PS: We better not study it further because it goes against our political beliefs.
Am I the only one who doubts that we humans have been recording sunspot activity for 8000 years?
The first known record of sunspot activity was in a column written by Helen Thomas.
"Inferred"? The title states in no uncertain terms that Sunspot Activity at 8000 Year High.
The article says any Sunspot evidence is "*inferred* from fossilized tree rings" that are 8000 years old.
Excuse me if I doubt the inference that anyone knows the sunspot activity in the year 6000 B.C.
Which sentence were you referring to?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.