The disappointing sunspot count of 2013

Two headlines making the circuit right now:
NASA.gov image for 3/7/2013.  Practically no sunspot activity.

Something unexpected is happening on the Sun. 2013 was supposed to be the year of “solar maximum,” the peak of the 11-year sunspot cycle. Yet 2013 has arrived and solar activity is relatively low. Sunspot numbers are well below their values from 2011, and strong solar flares have been infrequent.

AND:

Global temperatures are warmer than at any time in at least 4,000 years, scientists reported Thursday, and over the coming decades are likely to surpass levels not seen on the planet since before the last ice age.
Related in Opinion

Previous research had extended back roughly 1,500 years, and suggested that the rapid temperature spike of the past century, believed to be a consequence of human activity, exceeded any warming episode during those years. The new work confirms that result while suggesting the modern warming is unique over a longer period.

As usual, there is no connection made between the sun and global warming stories.  They WILL tell you it’s all man-made and that the sun does not affect the Earth’s climate.  As usual, we are just expected to believe this is just another coincidence.

News flash people, driving electric cars and using more expensive light bulbs will barely mitigate the Sun’s impact on Earth’s climate.  And, the Sun has been noticeably hotter the last thirty years.  It’s at a maximum in it’s cycle and NOTHING is happening.  Those sunspots and solar storms COOL the sun.  And, I would guess, cool the Earth as well.

When someone presents an argument that includes all of the obvious impacts on Earth’s climate and what we can do to exist within those parameters, I’ll buy into it.  Ignoring the most obvious impact and blaming it all on man is just stupid, and in most cases so far, is doing more harm than good.

<a href="http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/according-to-some-the-earths-climate-is-warmest-in-4000-years-and-the-suns-solar-activity-is-st/question-3568155/" onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://www.sodahead.com']);" title="According to some, the Earth's climate is warmest in 4,000 years, and the Sun's solar activity is strangely inactive. Coincidence?">According to some, the Earth&#8217;s climate is warmest in 4,000 years, and the Sun&#8217;s solar activity is strangely inactive. Coincidence?</a>

That pesky manmade asteroid problem

This is just stunning:

Deb Feyerick had to ask Bill Nye if asteroids might be a by-product of global warming.

I

Kid

You

Not.

And Obama still says Fox is not a reliable news source.

Although Nye more or less dodges the direct question and runs with his own self-promotion, I have to applaud him for not doing what I would have done and laughed hysterically.

 

Tiny Solar Activity Changes Affect Earth’s Climate

A few years ago I asked a rather famous and media saturated astronomer what he thought about the Sun’s impact on global warming.  I got a lecture that I had to be a flat-Earther to believe such garbage.

Now, it’s becoming fairly common:

 

…..solar energetic particles and cosmic rays could reduce ozone levels in the stratosphere. This in turn alters the behavior of the atmosphere below it, perhaps even pushing storms on the surface off course.

“In the lower stratosphere, the presence of ozone causes a local warming because of the breakup of ozone molecules by ultraviolet light,” climate scientist Jerry North at Texas A&M University told SPACE.com.

When the ozone is removed, “the stratosphere there becomes cooler, increasing the temperature contrast between the tropics and the polar region. The contrast in temperatures in the stratosphere and the upper troposphere leads to instabilities in the atmospheric flow west to east. The instabilities make for eddies or irregular motions.”

 

Tiny changes in solar energetic particles………

Something like this perhaps?

Solar cycles since 1850

Another green car bites the dust

After all kinds of hope and hype, the change is in the air.  GM stopped production of their Chevy Volts.  Some of that hope and hype was here, until I saw the price tag.  It’s just too expensive.  While Obama was handing out cash to big donors at the DNC, the average guy was trying to figure how to survive paying nearly $4.00 a gallon.  The hope Obama promised was in green technology.  When Chevrolet launched the Volt, people like me jumped all over it. Then we saw the price.  Rather than stimulating car sales ( private sector ), Obama took the usual socialist path and stimulated production.  That’s all fine and good if there is a market.  But, as with Solyndra and other failed green ventures, the market’s not there because the price is not feasible.  For $20,000 less the average person can buy an awful lot of gas.  Given the price of replacing batteries at nearly $10,000 a pop, a person has NO incentive to go green.  Until Obama understands the very basic principal of supply and DEMAND, this story will keep happening.  In order for this to work, the price of these vehicles has GOT to down!

<a href="http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/gm-suspending-chevrolet-volt-due-to-slow-sales-whoops-or-good-investment/question-3132371/" onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://www.sodahead.com']);" title="GM Suspending Chevrolet Volt Due to Slow Sales: Whoops or Good Investment?">GM Suspending Chevrolet Volt Due to Slow Sales: Whoops or Good Investment?</a>

Greenland’s Ice melt aka NASA drinks the kool-aid

On July 24, 2012, NASA ran this visual and accompanying story:

Satellites See Unprecedented Greenland Ice Sheet Surface Melt

The text was not too subtle:

Satellites See Unprecedented Greenland Ice Sheet Surface Melt

And NASA tears into several paragraphs of how extensive this event is.  As if that were not clear enough, they later refer to the event on their Facebook page as “the record surface ice melt”.

Tucked away in it all was this little bit at the end of the first article:

“Ice cores from Summit show that melting events of this type occur about once every 150 years on average. With the last one happening in 1889, this event is right on time,” says Lora Koenig, a Goddard glaciologist and a member of the research team analyzing the satellite data.

OK, which is it?  A “record” or something repetitive?  Maybe this post explains it a lot more clearly:

The President’s Budget will also increase NASA’s funding, accelerating work — constrained for years due to the budget demands of Constellation — on climate science, green aviation, science education, and other priorities.

Remember when Obama slashed space flight and funded climate research?  Apparently NASA didn’t.

 

Windmills causing localized global warming

Wind Farm

This has got to be another blow to the enlightened global warming alarmists:

New research published in the journal Nature Climate Change suggests that large wind farms might have a warming effect on the local climate.

Now, before go too far into this, although both articles are quick to point out that it’s a localized effect only, the problem with the global warming global impact is a whole bunch of localized warming effects.  So, to sort of dismiss this as not really sorta being a real problem isn’t fair.  Either it’s causing global warming or not.  In this case, it is.  And since they are spreading fast all over the planet, it’s a rapidly growing problem.

Toss in:

“The cumulative impacts are huge,” said Shawn Smallwood, one of the few  recognized experts studying the impact of wind farms on migratory birds. “It is  not inconceivable to me that we could reduce golden eagle populations by a great  deal, if not wipe them out.”
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/08/16/energy-in-america-dead-birds-unintended-consequence-wind-power-development/#ixzz1tpKjGtAj

That’s right, they’re killing endangered species.  That’s not indirectly, that’s the blades beating them to death.

Which makes me ponder the obvious:

<a href="http://www.sodahead.com/fun/should-wind-farms-be-banned/question-2631687/" onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://www.sodahead.com']);" title="Should wind farms be banned?">Should wind farms be banned?</a>

Keep your head up this weekend!

On September 12, 1991, the Upper Atmospheric Research Satellite was launched.  Almost 20 years later to the day, it’s expected to return .  No big deal you say?

UARS

 

It’s the size of your average school bus.

Granted all of it won’t make it to Earth, what does will be several hundred pounds most likely.  And,

It’s going to traverse some pretty popular areas.

Guess this is a good time do rehash my space junk rants?

The irony is someone might very get killed by a satellite designed to research man’s damage to the environment.

Al Gore sees racists

al gore's movie

First there were deniers, then flat-Earthers, and a few other insults.  When the entire argument fell apart, Al Gore didn’t give up.  He just moved the notch up a level.  Now we’re all racists:

“There came a time when people said, ‘Hey man, why do you talk that way? That’s wrong, I don’t go for that, so don’t talk that way around me. I just don’t believe that,’” Gore said.

“That happened in millions of conversations, and slowly the conversation was won. And we still have racism, God knows, but it’s so different now and so much better. And we have to win the conversation on climate.”

Which of course begs the question:

<a href="http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/public-opinion-al-gore-says-global-warming-skeptics-are-this-generations-racists-is-he-right/question-2119679/" onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://www.sodahead.com']);" title="PUBLIC OPINION > Al Gore Says Global Warming Skeptics Are This Generation&#8217;s Racists: Is He Right?&#8221;>PUBLIC OPINION > Al Gore Says Global Warming Skeptics Are This Generation&#8217;s Racists: Is He Right?</a>

But, a totally unscientific ( imagine THAT when discussing Al Gore! ) related question also arises based on his statement:

<a href="http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/al-gore-thinks-todays-racism-is-so-much-better-than-it-was-before/question-2120933/" onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://www.sodahead.com']);" title="Al Gore thinks today's racism is so much better than it was before">Al Gore thinks today&#8217;s racism is so much better than it was before</a>

Hurricane Irene

This is the path Hurricane Irene is expected to take, maybe:

Hurricane Irene 2011

Now, a quick question: How many people can name at least one of the previous eight named storms this year?

Yup, most people missed eight big storms so far this year.  Irene would be the ninth.

My gripe has been storms are too easily “named”.  A storm that spins in a little circle then peters out is not something that should have ever been named.  But, because of better technology, storms get named all the time.  Because of that, we need to redefine how hurricanes are named.

This all precludes the idea that some people have another reason to make sure we have more named storms now than we used to.

 

New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmism

Need to read this:

NASA satellite data from the years 2000 through 2011 show the Earth’s atmosphere is allowing far more heat to be released into space than alarmist computer models have predicted, reports a new study in the peer-reviewed science journal Remote Sensing. The study indicates far less future global warming will occur than United Nations computer models have predicted, and supports prior studies indicating increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide trap far less heat than alarmists have claimed.

The rest of it can be found here.