The chief reason for this grand denial that has gone on for twenty-plus years...are the “scientists”...who graduated from various universities in the 1970s and 1980s...with Earth Science degrees. To get a Earth science degree...you basically admitted that your overall interest in science itself was marginal and you never had great grades to brag about.
So the universities in the US started this simplified science program...which in most cases...involved no classes in solar or planetary sciences. So you breezed your way through four years of college with a basic introduction to forestry, weather, climate, the study of oceans, some light chemistry and biology...and toss in a journalism class or two. Then you went out into the world and discovered that you barely made any money at this Earth science stuff. But then you discovered that there were various grants sitting there, and you found projects of marginal value to get a grant for.
As days, weeks and months went by...you got more grants by finding more evidence of global warming. The guys who moved up in the control of the grants came to realize that companies, the US government, and foundations were hyped up on global warming...so naturally, you tilted the grants toward the warmer-wannabes. This got them nice cars, real houses, and imaginary leadership positions within foundations of zero value.
If you note off NPR...the various episodes where they interviewed global warming wannabes....and the question of solar cycles came up...immediate denial came up....for two reasons. First, you admit the truth, then the Earth sciences crowd loses the magic pass to the grant money, and the solar crowd gains total control. The second reason...lets go ahead and admit it....our Earth science crowd has no background in solar cycles to start with and couldn’t even describe how the cycle works.
So as you take the Earth science crowd....you will notice that they are mostly naive on politics and globalization but a bunch of the supporters of Earth science...come from the environmental groups and anti-globalization crowd. They manipulate and utilize the Earth science folks and the foundations. It’s like a pimp having a couple of good prostitutes...and making good money off each.
My suggestion...the next time you get into a discussion with a global warmer...ask them if they ever took a single class in solar science...I’m guessing answer in every single case will be no. Don’t give them any respect after that.
>>ask them if they ever took a single class in solar science
Heck, ask them if they had calculus-based undergraduate physics, the same courses required (typically in the sophomore year) for an engineering degree.
If the answer is no, then “no respect”, as before.
The Earth science majors I knew in College were either big time druggies or had the IQ of a box of rocks.
“My suggestion...the next time you get into a discussion with a global warmer...ask them if they ever took a single class in solar science...I’m guessing answer in every single case will be no. Don’t give them any respect after that.”
-—<>-—<>-—<>-—<>-—<>-—
Solar activity has LONG been known to be importantly correlated with Earth’s temperature. We still do not know exactly WHY, but it is irrefutable. See the article I link below for evidence.
Regarding Sol’s current behavior:
All the sunspots of the last two months have been “cycle 24” spots.
The DEFINING characteristic for the “parent cycle” is their magnetic polarity: whether the spot has an East->West magnetic field or vice-versa. “Newer cycle” spots are TYPICALLY at a “High latitude”, whether north or south latitude. “Old cycle” spots are even more typically found near the equator.
Note that the STARTING date for a cycle, however, is defined by the minimum of the 13-month average of sunspots. Right now, it appears quite possible that will have been in Nov-Dec’08. However, if Sol sleeps again for the next 2-3 months, that will be pushed into 2009. In the years around the minimum, both old cycle spots and new cycle spots are common. The first Cycle 24 spot in fact occurred as early as 2005.
Assuming a Dec.2008 minimum, Cycle 23 was in effect from May96-Dec08: 152months. The average length of solar cycles from 1944 to 1996 was 125 months. The length of solar cycles correlates EXTREMELY well to Earth’s temperature, a cycle one year longer corresponds to about a 0.3C lower temperature for Earth, with a lag time of 5-10years.
http://www.tmgnow.com/repository/solar/lassen1.html
These FACTS lead me to predict that the temperature of Earth will be 0.75C cooler in 2014 than it was in 2001. This is markedly different from the IPCC’s prediction of 0.3C warmer.
Probably Bush’s Fault... He may have stopped global warming.
By the way, I just LOVE your suggestion for dealing with global warming alarmists that I quoted above!