Global warming or climate change?

[Gewehr98]

Oh, heck, Mike, you won't need a statue.  Just wait for the next time my dogs want to go outside today.  If they don't hurry up and do their business, you'll have your lifelike statue.   

(And the Packers are playing the Giants in this weather tomorrow - Lambeau Field is an open stadium!)

[Sergeant Bob]

(And the Packers are playing the Giants in this weather tomorrow - Lambeau Field is an open stadium!)

Now thats football!

I'd like to see some of those kickball players have a game in those conditions.

I can hear the announcer......

C-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-L-L-L-L-L-D!!!!!!!!

[Art Eatman]

And now there's a bunch of sunspot experts down in Florida, associated with NASA, who correlate climate shifts with sunspot activity.  Their prediction is for a notable reduction in sunspots, over the next decade or six, and a corresponding cooling cycle of world temperatures.

Ain't it fun?

Art

[Iain]

Art - you mean these 'NASA affiliated experts' - http://www.armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?topic=10425.msg178856#msg178856 ?

[Sergeant Bob]

Art - you mean these 'NASA affiliated experts' - http://www.armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?topic=10425.msg178856#msg178856 ?

Maybe he means these NASA affiliated experts?

NASA STUDY FINDS INCREASING SOLAR TREND THAT CAN CHANGE CLIMATE

[Iain]

2003 Bob. And it's pretty well known that sunspots and other factors can affect climate.

"Although the inferred increase of solar irradiance in 24 years, about 0.1 percent, is not enough to cause notable climate change, the trend would be important if maintained for a century or more. Satellite observations of total solar irradiance have obtained a long enough record (over 24 years) to begin looking for this effect."

- so basically it's not affecting climate noticeably and if it were, it wouldn't be causing cooling.

The prediction of cooling temperatures due to sunspot acitivity did not come from NASA. NASA have noted that the sunspot cycle 24 seems to have started, some guy with an alleged history of scamming behaviour and no known climatological credentials pushes the cooling theory.

From google cache - even junkscience won't touch him - http://64.233.183.104/search?q=cache:5WBpbyqKcSEJ:www.junkscience.com/blog/2008/01/08/must-have-brass-ones/+The+Theory+of+Relational+Cycles+of+Solar+Activity&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=5&client=opera

http://64.233.183.104/search?q=cache:ndHytqWKm1cJ:www.junkscience.com/blog/2008/01/07/more-on-the-space-and-science-research-center-hoax/+space+and+science+research+center+hoax&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&client=opera

Excellent blog fodder, made more than a few people look foolish.

[HankB]

some guy with an alleged history of scamming behaviour and no known climatological credentials pushes the cooling warming theory.

Change one word and you're describing a Nobel prize winning ex-Vice President who's so concerned with it that he's maintaining the carbon footprint of a small village . . .

[Iain]

Always about Gore. The problem would exist without Gore, the scientists would still be producing their research without Gore. The only difference would be that there would be somewhat less publicity and another convenient target would have to be found. I'm not a fan of Gore either, and I've not seen his film.