I still remember when the IPCC climate scientists claimed solar forcing could not impact climate,and almost no climate model includes solar forcing. Nothing I have read has shown they have changed that in 20+ years. The very idea the SUN combined with natural activity(volcano's for example) cause most all climate change does not make anyone rich though.
-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
Climate Change Update........
- Thread starter JCSR
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
To be fair, I don't think the argument was to say the sun could not impact the climate. To say otherwise would be to say they don't understand the reasons we have seasons. Obviously they do. And they do use solar forcing in their climate models.
I'm not opposed to the idea that it's at least partly caused by humans. My skepticism is more that the models prove it. I don't think they do. I also don't think scientists know enough yet to know how much which factors cause which outcomes. If they did, their climate models would be a lot more accurate.
Al Gore the Climate Whore predicted a "hockey stick" which never happened, at least not anywhere near the timing claimed, nor anywhere near the magnitude. The absolute alarmism and panic, fueling absurd calls for an end to capitalism and the idea of freedom itself make it obvious there is more to climate change science than the actual climate.
I'm not opposed to the idea that it's at least partly caused by humans. My skepticism is more that the models prove it. I don't think they do. I also don't think scientists know enough yet to know how much which factors cause which outcomes. If they did, their climate models would be a lot more accurate.
Al Gore the Climate Whore predicted a "hockey stick" which never happened, at least not anywhere near the timing claimed, nor anywhere near the magnitude. The absolute alarmism and panic, fueling absurd calls for an end to capitalism and the idea of freedom itself make it obvious there is more to climate change science than the actual climate.
The people yelling about it, sure haven't seemed to have changed their own habits.
Any of them getting rid of their super large houses, beach front properties, airplanes, etc?
Any of them getting rid of their super large houses, beach front properties, airplanes, etc?
"The TAR states that the changes in solar irradiance are not the major cause of the temperature changes in the second half of the 20th century unless those changes can induce unknown large feedbacks in the climate system. The effects of galactic cosmic rays on the atmosphere (via cloud nucleation) and those due to shifts in the solar spectrum towards the ultraviolet (UV) range, at times of high solar activity, are largely unknown. The latter may produce changes in tropospheric circulation via changes in static stability resulting from the interaction of the increased UV radiation with stratospheric ozone. More research to investigate the effects of solar behaviour on climate is needed before the magnitude of solar effects on climate can be stated with certainty."
I could go into report 5,but in short the "climate" change the IPCC is looking at is only the last 50 years of data for the "warming" claim,and they state zero of it is cause by our solar activity.
Most scientist who are pointing out the flaws in the IPCC data and models disagree with solar activity not playing a larger role. Given the IPCC now blames the actual cooling that has been happening on a lower solar activity,they should be openly mocked.
If you want actual science you would not publish reports that contain the words "would,could possibly,likely,plausible,might,ect..." hundreds of times in each release like the IPCC does.
Last edited:
I'm not saying that the IPCC report shouldn't be mocked. But, saying that changes in solar irradiance are not the major cause of temperature changes is not the same thing as saying the sun can't influence the climate. For example, if they can measure it, and see that it has not changed over the same period that the earth warmed, (I'm not saying that's their claim, it's just for example) it's reasonable to think it did not cause the change. However, the alarming part to me is saying that they don't know **** about it, and that they need to learn more about it before they can say with certainty what effect it has, is a bigger red flag.
If you're going to use this **** to sell the idea of taking people's **** away and imposing communism, I think you better be pretty ***damn certain. Of course, certainty is not the goal. It's the communism part.
Of course not and that's how you know it's a scam. If it was actually an "existential crisis" the people in charge and other elites would be leading the charge and showing us by providing an example to the rest of us. For one thing, no one who really believes this would actually be flying huge jets anywhere, not when teleconferencing could address every needed meeting with people around the world. The fact that they continue to fly to these events, to show how rich and important they are, while staying at luxury resorts and eating the food they want to scold us for, shows it's all complete bull
Lets' not forget the massive heat sinks they keep telling everyone to install. I'm sure massive arrays of dark solar panels have zero effect on the local climate.
If I have to add purple I'm smacking someone upside the head.
If I have to add purple I'm smacking someone upside the head.
To save the planet from global warming is a retarded reason to install solar panels. They do contribute to raising the temps in urban areas.
To save $ in the long run, or get off the grid, solar panels are good for that especially when coupled with whole house batteries. It’s a large initial investment and this area rates a C for average sunlight hours. So the investment payback is longer.
It's been awhile but If I remember correctly, I remember looking at the numbers several years ago and by the time the solar panels start reaching their rated life span, it's about when the payback period ends. Convenient.
For us, yes. Places light FLorida, Texas or Arizona/California it's a lot quicker. A lot of that depends on the amount of sunlight per day, electricity costs and usage.
Well, sure. But I don't think that .gov is going to let people relocate official weather stations with them.
Bill Gates Pushes Plan to Chop Down 70 Million Acres of Trees to 'Fight Global Warming' - Slay News
Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates is funding a new effort that seeks to chop down a staggering 70 million acres of trees in an effort to allegedly "fight global warming."
slaynews.com
Bill Gates Pushes Plan to Chop Down 70 Million Acres of Trees to 'Fight Global Warming' - Slay News
Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates is funding a new effort that seeks to chop down a staggering 70 million acres of trees in an effort to allegedly "fight global warming."
Wut?
Still waiting on a plane to fly into the WEF group.
Bill Gates Pushes Plan to Chop Down 70 Million Acres of Trees to 'Fight Global Warming' - Slay News
Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates is funding a new effort that seeks to chop down a staggering 70 million acres of trees in an effort to allegedly "fight global warming."
What an evil POS.
Bill Gates Pushes Plan to Chop Down 70 Million Acres of Trees to 'Fight Global Warming' - Slay News
Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates is funding a new effort that seeks to chop down a staggering 70 million acres of trees in an effort to allegedly "fight global warming."
Bill Gates is a ****ing idiot that obviously never had to take a simple biology class.
Maunder minimum | Little Ice Age, Sunspots & Solar Cycles
Maunder minimum, unexplained period of drastically reduced sunspot activity that occurred between 1645 and 1715. Sunspot activity waxes and wanes with roughly an 11-year cycle. In 1894 the English astronomer Edward Walter Maunder pointed out that very few sunspots had been observed between 1645 and
Uhhh, the reason we have seasons is axial tilt. Variability of solar output has nothing to do with it
Not to mention that the power wall/battery storage is known to occasionally burst into difficult to extinguish flames that will burn your house down
Site Supporter
Staff online
-
d.kaufmanStill Here
Members online
- db308
- freekforge
- Flingarrows
- Yamadog35
- flint stonez
- Bartman
- BigMoose
- buckwacker
- indyblue
- Indyhd
- Donnie317
- Cldedhnds
- jsharmon7
- Mgderf
- Super Bee
- INP8riot
- kcruisin
- Wolfhound
- KittySlayer
- Onebad06vtx
- Geoman1
- Hop
- mike trible
- cosermann
- Chip
- ChooterMcGavin1973
- papa6x
- 2tonic
- Flash-hider
- maxipum
- d.kaufman
- Doug
- Pyro
- 700 LTR 223
- djlaundry2000
- KG1
- Knight Rider
- Hkindiana
- ws6guy
- dmarsh8
- Bennettjh
- brettholycross
- Dog1
- BoilerWes
- Taylor22
- Creedmoor
- ChristianPatriot
- JoeSig
- edporch
- WebSnyper