Thread: What happened to global warming?

I want to say that depsite my views i don't think we should continue to polute the air. However, i just believe that the governments are capitalizing on natural events by creating fear amongst the gullable. Paying high taxes is not going to change things, and I even doubt cutting emitions and changing to alternative fuels will make a difference as far as the bigger picture is concerend. Our attemts to change these natural cycles in my opinion is just a drop in the ocean water.

What all the above geniuses have failed to include is that the sun has been at a historically low point in its output. It declined over the last decade and will emerge/is emerging from this period of very low activity. Solar output is going to increase, as will temperatures. Here's some scientific research for you...up to you if you believe it/trust it.

Solar Cycle Linked To Global Climate

Solar Cycle Linked To Global Climate

ScienceDaily (July 17, 2009) — Establishing a key link between the solar cycle and global climate, research led by scientists at the National Science Foundation (NSF)-funded National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) in Boulder, Colo., shows that maximum solar activity and its aftermath have impacts on Earth that resemble La Niña and El Niño events in the tropical Pacific Ocean.


The research may pave the way toward predictions of temperature and precipitation patterns at certain times during the approximately 11-year solar cycle.
"These results are striking in that they point to a scientifically feasible series of events that link the 11-year solar cycle with ENSO, the tropical Pacific phenomenon that so strongly influences climate variability around the world," says Jay Fein, program director in NSF's Division of Atmospheric Sciences. "The next step is to confirm or dispute these intriguing model results with observational data analyses and targeted new observations."

The total energy reaching Earth from the sun varies by only 0.1 percent across the solar cycle. Scientists have sought for decades to link these ups and downs to natural weather and climate variations and distinguish their subtle effects from the larger pattern of human-caused global warming.
Building on previous work, the NCAR researchers used computer models of global climate and more than a century of ocean temperature to answer longstanding questions about the connection between solar activity and global climate.
The research, published in July in a paper in the Journal of Climate, was funded by NSF, NCAR's sponsor, and by the U.S. Department of Energy.
"We have fleshed out the effects of a new mechanism to understand what happens in the tropical Pacific when there is a maximum of solar activity," says NCAR scientist Gerald Meehl, the paper's lead author. "When the sun's output peaks, it has far-ranging and often subtle impacts on tropical precipitation and on weather systems around much of the world."
The new paper, along with an earlier one by Meehl and colleagues, shows that as the Sun reaches maximum activity, it heats cloud-free parts of the Pacific Ocean enough to increase evaporation, intensify tropical rainfall and the trade winds, and cool the eastern tropical Pacific.

The result of this chain of events is similar to a La Niña event, although the cooling of about 1-2 degrees Fahrenheit is focused further east and is only about half as strong as for a typical La Niña.
Over the following year or two, the La Niña-like pattern triggered by the solar maximum tends to evolve into an El Niño-like pattern, as slow-moving currents replace the cool water over the eastern tropical Pacific with warmer-than-usual water.

Again, the ocean response is only about half as strong as with El Niño.
True La Niña and El Niño events are associated with changes in the temperatures of surface waters of the eastern Pacific Ocean. They can affect weather patterns worldwide.

The paper does not analyze the weather impacts of the solar-driven events. But Meehl and his co-author, Julie Arblaster of both NCAR and the Australian Bureau of Meteorology, found that the solar-driven La Niña tends to cause relatively warm and dry conditions across parts of western North America.
More research will be needed to determine the additional impacts of these events on weather across the world.

"Building on our understanding of the solar cycle, we may be able to connect its influences with weather probabilities in a way that can feed into longer-term predictions, a decade at a time," Meehl says.
Scientists have known for years that long-term solar variations affect certain weather patterns, including droughts and regional temperatures.
But establishing a physical connection between the decadal solar cycle and global climate patterns has proven elusive.

One reason is that only in recent years have computer models been able to realistically simulate the processes associated with tropical Pacific warming and cooling associated with El Niño and La Niña.
With those models now in hand, scientists can reproduce the last century's solar behavior and see how it affects the Pacific.
To tease out these sometimes subtle connections between the sun and Earth, Meehl and his colleagues analyzed sea surface temperatures from 1890 to 2006. They then used two computer models based at NCAR to simulate the response of the oceans to changes in solar output.

They found that, as the sun's output reaches a peak, the small amount of extra sunshine over several years causes a slight increase in local atmospheric heating, especially across parts of the tropical and subtropical Pacific where Sun-blocking clouds are normally scarce.

That small amount of extra heat leads to more evaporation, producing extra water vapor. In turn, the moisture is carried by trade winds to the normally rainy areas of the western tropical Pacific, fueling heavier rains.

As this climatic loop intensifies, the trade winds strengthen. That keeps the eastern Pacific even cooler and drier than usual, producing La Niña-like conditions.
Although this Pacific pattern is produced by the solar maximum, the authors found that its switch to an El Niño-like state is likely triggered by the same kind of processes that normally lead from La Niña to El Niño.

The transition starts when the changes of the strength of the trade winds produce slow-moving off-equatorial pulses known as Rossby waves in the upper ocean, which take about a year to travel back west across the Pacific.

The energy then reflects from the western boundary of the tropical Pacific and ricochets eastward along the equator, deepening the upper layer of water and warming the ocean surface.

As a result, the Pacific experiences an El Niño-like event about two years after solar maximum. The event settles down after about a year, and the system returns to a neutral state.

"El Niño and La Niña seem to have their own separate mechanisms," says Meehl, "but the solar maximum can come along and tilt the probabilities toward a weak La Niña. If the system was heading toward a La Niña anyway," he adds, "it would presumably be a larger one."

Originally Posted by Jesus Jones

I want to say that depsite my views i don't think we should continue to polute the air. However, i just believe that the governments are capitalizing on natural events by creating fear amongst the gullable. Paying high taxes is not going to change things, and I even doubt cutting emitions and changing to alternative fuels will make a difference as far as the bigger picture is concerend. Our attemts to change these natural cycles in my opinion is just a drop in the ocean water.

You're using an avatar of Ron Paul so I assume you're American. I'm a big fan of Dr. Paul and I'd like to know why you are concerned about the relation of paying high taxes and global warming. I'm a bit confused. Say, tomorrow, we found a car that ran off of water. How much tax money would the government lose by losing those taxes added to the cost of fuel? I love Republicans, not you, using the scare tactic that Democrats are going to raise taxes. What is their motivation in saying this?

During the first quarter of 2009 the average fuel tax in the U.S. was .27 cents for state and .25 cents for federal per gallon. That is about .50 cents for ever gallon used going to taxes. So now factor in advertising telling my fellow American consumers that we would be happy and complete if we drove an SUV that gets 15 miles to the gallon. How many cars are on the road? We use about 400,000,000 gallons of gas in the US EACH DAY. How much money in taxes does the government make off of gasoline? How much money in taxes does the government make off of anything transported in the US? So if the price of gas goes up and all goods and services go up as a result the government is making more money off of taxes as a result of higher fuel cost. They don't call it raising taxes, but that is what it is! If you're paying more for everything, you're paying higher taxes! There is no incentive to increase fuel economy or for using alternative fuels because the government would lose money. If we all walked outside tomorrow and started our cars and they magically ran off water the country would go broke.

Why is there very little good public transportation in the US? What is the incentive?

Originally Posted by Don Juan

I know what's coming next.

Whenever these guys are presented with evidence which contradicts their view, they either ignore it or pretend it doesn’t exist.

kinda like entering into a debate with a thai, or antrobertson, isn't it............i

There are 2 versions of the Consise Oxford dictionary one the government have censored and allow the lemmings to see ,, the other one is for private view for the chosen few ,,,,,,,, I let you into a secret ,,,,,,,,, I am not one of the chosen few ,, BUT >>>>>> I have seen a private view .

I let you into the secret of 2 definitions .

1.. Global warming ,, ( an excuse to tax the fuck out of the working class in the name of saving the planet )

2. Care in the community ( an excuse to absolve the government of any responsibility financial or otherwise to release the previously locked up and hospitalised mentally ill amongst us )


Ohhhhhhhhhhh my God how cynical you are Nigel !!!!!!