jonboy

But GW if it was just looking at the science from a pure perspective that would be fine but more often than not the language used against those who take an opposite view is at best impolite and at worst downright offensive. This is not war we are not in some battle to save earth although clearly some think we are. As far as I'm concerned the science isn't settled and to say when new research is being done that that area was settled and debunked years ago does not show an open mind. Far to many on the Climate Change thread's show closed minds

Exactly the predictions where totally wrong. I have put a couple of recent papers on what modulates the suns activity over in the research thread. This and the next cycle are now predicted to be low before a rebound in cycle 26 and 27. This means that if we believe in solar influence being the main climate driver then cooling will occur until at least 2040/50 before climbing again. But don't expect a mini ice age unless we start to see some extensive volcanic activity which could push temps sufficiently downwards. Again there are papers out there that link low solar cycles with increased volcanic activity so its anyone guess but for some it will be our fault whatever the outcome

Hi Knocker that is a must read for all those who wish to debate this topic and highlights what is bad about much of the rhetoric that happens in the climate change threads. Excellent find

So poetic license or a dismishing of solar influence? Mind you given the downturn in solar wind strength perhaps a feather would have a greater effect!!

Without seeing the program if it just covers the drop of of cycle 24 and the next cycle and likely impact without tying inprevious strength of past cycles and the impacts on warming then its a misleading piece of journalism in my opinion

01040411.pdf Not new research but shows how sunspot cycle length and solar wind strength correlate with both general temperature increase including the cooling in the 50's

I don't think we are heading for a grand minimum like the last mini ice age but every indication is that cycle 24 has reached max and is about to fall through the floor and will be relatively short in duration and cycle 25 will be even lower then building back through cycles 26 and 27. In regard to the hiatus/cooling around the 1950's I attach a paper that can explain this around solar flux/magnetic field strength http://www.appinsys.com/GlobalWarming/EarthMagneticField.htm I also attach an intresting paper that links Uranus and Neptune to solar max and min and their relative intensities http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?paperID=36513reference These in my opinion show why we have warmed why we are at a pause and entering a cool period and why come 2100 we will be back to temps associated with the medevial warm period

prp-2-1-2014.pdfA new paper by Scaffeta on solar harmonics and earths climate

But why deny it and spend thousands trying to keep it secret?

Agreed it was no pleasure cruise but it wasn't unbiased science either. Lets not forget Chris Turner has set up two Carbon capture companies and I'm sure any findings would have clearly shown the need for reducing carbon hence my suspiscion of the motives involved

If anything we have seen the peak now and are about to see a return to a quieter phase

As usual on this topic those who advocate CO2 to be the drive rely on others to explain their views rather than being able to explain in a sensible manner the mechanisms involved from cradle to grave the CO2 impacts. Is this because its all theory and conjecture rather than real science !!!!

yet we are about to see a change of synoptic's in the area does this every enter your mindset GW

a consequence of global warming which is very much underway already. Shrinking Arctic sea ice, less snow cover on land in spring and summer I'm sorry Knock's but CO2 is not the driver for shrinking ice or snow cover if anything these elements come late summer last time arround where higher than previous years but we didn't see cold plunges etc then did we. One of the causes is as the article states the temperature gradient and that's so large at the moment not because of how warm the warm side is but rather how cold the artic vortex is that has spilled out / displaced from its normal location this has created the low pressure systems and then there is the strong high thats been sittin above Japan. These are not consequenses of increases in CO2 WE must also remeber that IPCC5 states that we will see warmer winters etc yet we are seeing the opposite and I'm not talking about just this year but in general over the last 3/4 years. There can be no arguement that we are seeing an increase in the use of 'Climate Change' (and by default global warming as no one as defined what is meant by 'Climate Change') by our political masters to blame any weather event that is out of the recent norm. This is brainwashing the general populus by default into accepting taxes etc when the science is not remotely settled.

All very interesting until its linked to Climate change When will any research related to carbon stop using the phrase 'Climate Change' It's almost appears that research cannot be carried out unless its tied in in some way to this new mantra In my opinion its a disservice to science

As I've already pointed out on the board the plunge on July 3rd 2013 is nearly identical to the one they've just seen so something seems to be pinning positioning? ( and we've lost our trough and so had a nice summer..... long may that continue!) and figuring how that occurs would allow us to better prepare for flood events/drought/cold outbreaks etc Well it isn't down to CO2 thats for sure!!!

I see many think any cold will be just a 2/3 day affair. Over the last tweleve monthes or more what we have seen is that once a pattern change occurs it generally lasts for 6/8 weeks I see no reason why this won't be the case again. The question is how deep will the cold get and will it contain snow

I'm surprised GW that you have posted such a biased sensationalist report which adds not one jot either way!!!!

Francis said a certain frequency of very amplified jet stream occurrences is normal, but that global warming is causing the frequency to rise beyond normal. We know that the jet is amplified etc and obviously causes thes areas of extreme cold or warmth but how does global warming cause this? I've yet to see an explanation that goes from increased CO2 causes x which causes y which causes jet to be amplified. At this point in time linking this to global warming is plain wrong

If you go to http://squall.sfsu.edu/scripts/shemjet_archloop.html you can quickly build an animation of the jet stream. Comparing September/October animations from 2010 to 2013 shows how the jet stream has been slowly moving north over this period.

a semipermanent area of open water in sea ice. Polynyas are generally believed to be of two types. Coastal polynyas characteristically lie just beyond landfast ice, i.e., ice that is anchored to the coast and stays in place throughout the winter. They are thought to be caused chiefly by persistent local offshore winds, such as the foehn, or katabatic (downward-driving), winds typically found off the coasts of Greenland and Antarctica. Open-ocean polynyas, the larger and longer-lasting of the two types, form within the ice cover and are believed to be caused by the upwelling of deep warmer water. This type is best exemplified by the vast Weddell Polynya in the antarctic Weddell Sea.

Again reanalysis of data 1979 to 2001 so hence HISTORICAL

No the article states this "Understanding the differences between these two forcings is important in predicting what will happen as the ozone hole recovers," she said. "The jet stream is expected to shift back toward the north as ozone is replenished, yet the greenhouse-gas effect could negate this.' And the ozone is in the process of recovery and the jet has moved north in the southern hemisphere

That article does not cover the period from 2001 but relates tp 1979 to 2001. I believe that trend has now been reversed. Again no attempt to explain this yet I believe that lower UV levels seen since the start of this cycle 24 is influencing the jet in both hemisphere's ie in the North pushing it South and in the South pushing it North. Again this would perhaps be better placed in another thread as we are infering this is man's fault!!!!!

So what has the first got to do with someone's ability to make a post? So now if we clean up the planet and go green we are going to warm the world so whichever way we look at it we are doomed might as well accept our fate and get the barbie polished