NASA Study Says Sun Might Be The Reason for “Global Warming”
Aaron's EnvironMental Corner
This story has already made its rounds over the weekend, permeating all kinds of media. Of course, it was on the weekend, so most people missed it in the main stream media. I think it got a mention on the nightly news as a “possible reason” for global warming.
The real data, however, is showing that the solar cycle, which includes flares and emissions changes from the sun, has more to do with the planet’s climate than anything else. The NASA report attributes recent trends to cyclic variation and not to man’s “emissions.”
There are plenty of skeptics on this, of course. Those skeptics, who are usually called “mainstream,” are the global warming cabal who are now attempting to marginalize the NASA report. They argue that the report is “too limited” and doesn’t have enough information. Interesting, since that’s exactly what the skeptics against the man-made global warming proponents use against them. Hmm…
The sun goes in cycles of about 11 years, with the next solar maximum coming in 2012. Right on that Mayan calendar. Which brings another point, not really mentioned in the short NASA writeup: these 11 year cycles are miniature cycles that are part of the overall cycle which is represented in the Zodiac and Mayan Calendars and what modern science calls the Ice Ages.
Right now, so you know, we’re in the process of emerging from the “mini-ice age” that was the cause of all of the global climate problems up to the 1800s. A little tidbit the Gorebots generally overlook. Same with the extremely warm period before that, the height of which made Greenland green and brought on the Viking era.
So, back to NASA’s report, which acknowledges two important facts before reversing itself and pandering to the global warming elitists:
1. The sun has had a major influence in global warming and cooling in the past.
2. The sun is likely to play a significant role in future climate change.
What they avoid saying, of course, is that it’s playing a role now. Nice of them. Nobody wins Nobel Prizes for disproving a commonly-held, grant-getting theory of the sky falling. They win Nobels for making predictions of global catastrophe based on specially-picked data that backs up their claims. Then they make a Power Point and go on the road.
NASA’s website, like all scientific endeavors that get tangled up in the politics of global warming, is rife with contradictions about the true cause(s) of the phenomenon. This report is a nice synopsis of those contradictions, nicely laid out in a little biosphere of the overall nature of the man-made climate change arguments (for and against).
My views, of course, are that we are definitely having an impact on our planet’s climate, but I don’t think it’s nearly to the degree that the Gorebots and proponents of things like cap-and-trade would have us believe. There are a lot of reasons for this, namely the amount of CO2 we emit versus what’s in the atmosphere naturally (volcanoes, geysers, buffalo farts, and so forth) is almost insignificant. Ad to that the evidence that the dinosaur ages showed huge amounts of CO2 (versus now) in the atmosphere and the question of whether increased CO2 levels are a cause or effect on climate warming becomes a hard one to answer.
I think that our impact as humans is much more significant in other ways that are much more obvious and generally less contentious. Things like garbage, nuclear waste, the environmental impacts of various industrial and mining activities, etc. We have real, plausible, workable ways of dealing with those obvious impacts. Why aren’t we focusing more on that?
Probably because you can’t install a global tax system based on what a relatively small percentage of people are doing. “Global warming” as a man-made phenomenon can be blamed on every human and thus be an excuse for taxing every human.
It’s my belief that this is literally how Al Gore and his compatriots think of the issue. They aren’t out to save humanity, they’re out to figure out how to tax it as a whole. The sooner the Gorebots realize this, the sooner we can get on to some real environmental issues and stop wasting all this time, energy, and debate on man-made global CO2 emissions.
-----
Got comments? Email me, dammit!
Permanent link for this article which can be used on any website:
This story has already made its rounds over the weekend, permeating all kinds of media. Of course, it was on the weekend, so most people missed it in the main stream media. I think it got a mention on the nightly news as a “possible reason” for global warming.
The real data, however, is showing that the solar cycle, which includes flares and emissions changes from the sun, has more to do with the planet’s climate than anything else. The NASA report attributes recent trends to cyclic variation and not to man’s “emissions.”
There are plenty of skeptics on this, of course. Those skeptics, who are usually called “mainstream,” are the global warming cabal who are now attempting to marginalize the NASA report. They argue that the report is “too limited” and doesn’t have enough information. Interesting, since that’s exactly what the skeptics against the man-made global warming proponents use against them. Hmm…
The sun goes in cycles of about 11 years, with the next solar maximum coming in 2012. Right on that Mayan calendar. Which brings another point, not really mentioned in the short NASA writeup: these 11 year cycles are miniature cycles that are part of the overall cycle which is represented in the Zodiac and Mayan Calendars and what modern science calls the Ice Ages.
Right now, so you know, we’re in the process of emerging from the “mini-ice age” that was the cause of all of the global climate problems up to the 1800s. A little tidbit the Gorebots generally overlook. Same with the extremely warm period before that, the height of which made Greenland green and brought on the Viking era.
So, back to NASA’s report, which acknowledges two important facts before reversing itself and pandering to the global warming elitists:
1. The sun has had a major influence in global warming and cooling in the past.
2. The sun is likely to play a significant role in future climate change.
What they avoid saying, of course, is that it’s playing a role now. Nice of them. Nobody wins Nobel Prizes for disproving a commonly-held, grant-getting theory of the sky falling. They win Nobels for making predictions of global catastrophe based on specially-picked data that backs up their claims. Then they make a Power Point and go on the road.
NASA’s website, like all scientific endeavors that get tangled up in the politics of global warming, is rife with contradictions about the true cause(s) of the phenomenon. This report is a nice synopsis of those contradictions, nicely laid out in a little biosphere of the overall nature of the man-made climate change arguments (for and against).
My views, of course, are that we are definitely having an impact on our planet’s climate, but I don’t think it’s nearly to the degree that the Gorebots and proponents of things like cap-and-trade would have us believe. There are a lot of reasons for this, namely the amount of CO2 we emit versus what’s in the atmosphere naturally (volcanoes, geysers, buffalo farts, and so forth) is almost insignificant. Ad to that the evidence that the dinosaur ages showed huge amounts of CO2 (versus now) in the atmosphere and the question of whether increased CO2 levels are a cause or effect on climate warming becomes a hard one to answer.
I think that our impact as humans is much more significant in other ways that are much more obvious and generally less contentious. Things like garbage, nuclear waste, the environmental impacts of various industrial and mining activities, etc. We have real, plausible, workable ways of dealing with those obvious impacts. Why aren’t we focusing more on that?
Probably because you can’t install a global tax system based on what a relatively small percentage of people are doing. “Global warming” as a man-made phenomenon can be blamed on every human and thus be an excuse for taxing every human.
It’s my belief that this is literally how Al Gore and his compatriots think of the issue. They aren’t out to save humanity, they’re out to figure out how to tax it as a whole. The sooner the Gorebots realize this, the sooner we can get on to some real environmental issues and stop wasting all this time, energy, and debate on man-made global CO2 emissions.
-----
Got comments? Email me, dammit!
Permanent link for this article which can be used on any website:
posted by Aaron Turpen @ 8:36 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home