Eschatology and Global Warming

I've answered all that. I'm done. I know when there's no point in continuing to reason.

 

Utterly FALSE I live in the region where Precipitation has no long-term trend change.

The wildfires are larger in wet winter/spring years smaller in drier years and there were arson reports on some of the fires too which you don't even consider at all.

 

How nice for you but that has no bearing on my statement.

 

Drought is negligible in the Pacific Northwest for the first 4 months of 2024 from the NOAA LINK

 

Did you write this,

LOL........

Suuuure.........

 

If you are getting your info off of blogs you are not repeat NOT “following science”

 

As you wish.

 

Professor Mass (University of Washington) would disagree. I'm sure he considers his blog to be science.

 

Noble cause corruption excuses statistical sleight-of-hand to further the alarmist narrative.
Science of Heat Waves Reveals Blaming CO2 is a Scam!
Jim Steele
To blame heat waves on rising CO2, alarmists must use statistical attribution tricks. . . .

. . . Any warming of the earth’s surface from the greenhouse effect or any other cause, would cause air to rise, the exact opposite of how heat waves are formed. To blame heat waves on rising CO2, alarmists must use statistical attribution tricks. They simply claim higher global average temperatures make the heat wave hotter, even when the heat wave is centered over regions where the has been no local warming. Clearly there are lies, damn lies and statistics and most alarmist climate scientists know how to manipulate statistics.

 

Yeah, I replied to Nick Stokes who shows his amazing inability to understand why high-pressure ridges (FAIR WEATHER) are associated with increasing sunlight, dryer air and increasing temperatures, it seems even someone with a PHD in Mathematics flops badly as Jim Steele was destroying him in his replies it is worth reading as it is an effective teaching session in reading them and generates laughing too.


My reply which he completely ignored:

 

As usual, you failed to undersstand him.

Nothing in your SafeSpace there has changed for over a decade. It's the same howler monkeys getting everything wrong.

Y'all haven't explained why heat waves are more severe now. Describing what causes local heat waves doesn't explain why they've gotten worse.

But then, that's what deniers do, evade the topic. That's what this thread is about. It's why nobody pays any attention to deniers any more. They're not doing any science.

 

This has been shown to you several times already.

1. The 20th century solar maximum

Since low solar activity causes cooling, it stands to reason that high activity must cause warming. Solar activity in the 20th century was very high, in the top 10% of the last 11,000 years.

If we count the number of sunspots in each solar cycle over the last 300 years and divide by the length of each cycle, we can see how much solar activity has deviated from the average. Since the Maunder Minimum, during the Little Ice Age, solar activity has been increasing and was well above average between 1933 and 1996, a period of six cycles of increased solar activity that formed the 20th century solar maximum.



Although we cannot know how much of the 20th century warming is due to this modern solar maximum, there is no denying that it is a significant part, because as we have seen, the Sun has been the cause of much of the major climate change over the past 11,000 years.

How we know that the sun changes the Climate. Part I: The past
Posted on April 18, 2024 by curryja | 389 comments
by Javier Vinós

Part I of a three part series.

Continue reading →

 

Everyone else didn't agree with him either and you didn't read my comment which is right in front of you which you didn't even try to counter it thus your entre post was dead on arrival,

Here is my quote, I challenge you to address it:

But I predict it is too difficult for you to handle as you already bypassed it once.

There isn't any increase in heatwaves it actually less than in previous decades as shown by the EPA and the NOAA,

Regarding heat, very hot days in the US (over 100°F, or 38°C) were much higher in the 1930s than at any other time in the last 125 years.






But if you want to worry about heat waves, please get back to me when the heat waves are worse than those of the 1930s, well before the large increase in CO2 …

 

Nick writes this stupidity LINK

You going to stand by this utter nonsense?

The Math major still doesn't learn that air rises in LOW pressure systems and Sinks in HIGH pressure systems, it has been known for many decades which is 101 stuffs as explained in my college level Meteorology book.

 

Why? After all, it's just a dumb deflection that has nothing to do with the topic, that being why it's getting hotter, and heat waves are getting worse.

Your heat wave stuff is not correct. As usual, you confuse the noise with the signal. That's one of your staple tactics.

https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/climate-change-indicators-heat-waves

 

Wow. You're saying mass is not conserved? Bragging about it, screaming it to the heavens?

And to think you wonder why nobody takes you seriously.

He's right. You're wrong.

 

The debunking of your bad theory has been presented many times.

For your theory to be true, the oceans would now have to be transferring net heat into the atmosphere. That means ocean heat content would have to be declining, or at least rising much more slowly.

It's not. Ocean heat content is rising steadily, or even showing an increasing rate of rise. Thus, your theory is disproved.

"It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong."
--- Richard P. Feynman

 

Tsk tsk.

Sun’s Effect on the Ocean
Years ago, some scientists studied the rates of warming and cooling in the upper layer of the tropical oceans. They found that it follows a cycle similar to that of the Sun.[iii] However, there is a problem: the variation in the Sun’s energy is ten times smaller than it would need to be to cause these changes. Instead of thinking that this supported an indirect effect of the Sun on climate, most scientists ignored the study.



Figure from White et al. 2003. Upper, heat storage anomaly above the 22°C isotherm from 30°S to 30°N expressed in W (stored)/m2. Lower, solar irradiation anomaly.

In the Pacific, trade winds push warm surface water westward, bringing up deep, cold water off the coast of South America. This is called the Neutral phase. In some years, the trade winds become stronger and push the cold water toward the center of the Pacific, accumulating more warm water to the west. This is the La Niña phase. In other years, the trade winds blow more slowly or in the opposite direction, the cold water stops rising in the east, and the water in the central and eastern Pacific warms. This is the El Niño phase. This oscillation affects the weather of much of the planet and we must remember that it has three states, not two.

Since 1990, there have been countless studies on the solar cycle and El Niño. You will not find any reference to them in review articles, books or IPCC reports.

I set out to investigate this relationship using solar activity data and the Oceanic El Niño Index, which shows in blue the periods when the equatorial Pacific is cooler than average and in red when it is warmer. Since solar cycles have slightly different lengths, I divided both data series into segments of a solar cycle and then adjusted the length to be the same for all cycles. This statistical technique is called epoch analysis. In this way, the mean and variance of the data are determined for periods that coincide in their phase of the cycle. This revealed a pattern that indicates an El Niño response to solar activity. I looked at a period when the cycle is gaining activity, which is accompanied by La Niña conditions. I used the Monte Carlo method to determine the probability that this result was random, and the answer was only 0.7%. This means that there is a 99.3% chance that the La Niña conditions at this time in the solar cycle are due to the Sun.



Figure shows Epoch analysis of solar activity and Oceanic El Niño Index. X-axis is the variable length of a full solar cycle. Right curves show the mean and standard deviation of left curves. Red rectangle indicates the part of the data analyzed by Monte Carlo method.

Since the answer is clearer for La Niña, I analyzed the relative frequencies of each phase of the El Niño phenomenon. What is observed is that the Neutral condition years follow the solar cycle in their frequency with a delay of one or two years. Surprisingly, the frequency of La Niña is the opposite of Neutral. The solar activity determines whether it is a La Niña year or a Neutral year. The Sun’s effect on El Niño years is less clear. El Niño seems to have another cause, which could be the amount of heat accumulated in the ocean. The solar pattern is confirmed by a study of El Niño frequencies since 1900, because among the repeating peaks there is an 11-year peak, which is the frequency of the solar cycle.[iv]



Figure shows the relative frequency for Neutral years (orange) and La Niña years (blue) from the official (Domeisen et al. 2019) classification shown in the bottom squares. Frequency was calculated for a 5-year sliding window and Gaussian smoothed.

It is striking that with so much evidence and studies, the vast majority of scientists do not know that the Sun controls the very important El Niño phenomenon. But El Niño is a product of the action of the trade winds over the equatorial Pacific. To control El Niño, the Sun must control the atmospheric circulation. . . .

How we know that the sun changes climate (II). The present
Posted on May 17, 2024 by curryja | 341 comments
by Javier Vinós

 

Nice try Mamooth but you failed to realize that the EPA chart I posted which goes back to 1890 still exist as thumbprint on the EPA website in their effort to hide the inconvenient data while it was pushed down the list to add the newer misleading chart that starts in the 1960's in its place YOU fell for foolishly as fully explained in this LINK

LOL

 

No, it isn't correct,


Here are TWO comments LINK further down that explains why Nick is making an utter fool of himself:

and,

 

LINK for post 244

 

Why link back to nonsense that nobody cares about?

 

And after that irrelevent bit of mathturbation, ocean heat content is still soaring, showing that your theory is wrong.

Why don't we start with the basics. Precisely what is your theory?

 

Nope. Ocean heat content is cyclical. Links have been provided. You are merely denying.


How we know the sun changes the climate. III: Theories
Posted on June 11, 2024 by curryja | 153 comments
By Javier Vinós

Part I in this series on the Sun and climate described how we know that the Sun has been responsible for some of the major climate changes that have occurred over the past 11,000 years. In Part II, we considered a range of changes that the Sun is causing in the climate today, including changes in the planet’s rotation and in the polar vortex that are changing the frequency of cold winters.

None of the evidence for the Sun’s effect on climate we reviewed is included in the IPCC reports. The role of the IPCC is to assess the risk of human-induced climate change, not to find the causes of climate change, which since its inception has been assumed to be due to our emissions. . . .

Continue reading →

1. Conclusion

The Sun has a lot to say about future climate, but we are not listening. Long-term changes in solar activity are cyclical, and what adds to warming now will subtract from it in the future. This theory does not deny that changes in CO₂ affect climate, and indeed it is based on differences in emissions due to changes in the greenhouse effect, just not in time, but in space, with latitude. But it is undeniable that if the Sun has played a relevant role in the warming of the 20th century, it reduces the role our emissions have played.

 

It's probably worth mentioning (and mischievous, too) that the Holy Bible, in 2nd Peter, Chapter 3, Verse 10, predicts that the Earth shall be destroyed by FIRE:

"But the day of the Lord will come like a thief. The heavens will disappear with a roar; the elements will be destroyed by fire, and the earth and everything done in it will be laid bare." Link: https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2 Peter 3&version=NIV

If you live west of the Mississippi River, you won't be shocked to remember that prediction. Its seems like fully half the year, out west we're having high fire danger and "Red Flag Warnings" so much of the time. High temperatures in the summer have always been 'normal' -- but now we almost never get the afternoon thundershowers like we always used to.