| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
bznoo
Guest
|
 Posted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 7:57 am Post subject: Sunspots Spell End Of Climate Myth |
 |
|
Stuff.co.nz
November 11 2008
QUOTE: Computer-based climate models provide the only "evidence" supporting
claims that the world is warming, that it will be dangerous, that there will
be rapid rises in sea levels and the like, yet these same models failed to
predict the temperature peak in 1998 and the steady cooling trend that set
in from 2002.
It is disturbing that many recent statements on climate change by
influential people are not supported by hard evidence......
For instance, Professor Ralph Chapman>s statement that the globe risks a
tipping point if emissions are not reduced by 2015 is unsupported by hard
evidence, as is David Parker>s claim that if we do nothing to reduce
emissions, New Zealand could be up to $500 million worse off by 2012.
This is not true because, if we adopt the Emissions Trading Scheme,
electricity bills alone will increase by more than $500 million each year.
On Kyoto, lawyer Alistair Hercus recently claimed that "as a country we have
to pay". In fact, the Kyoto protocol says nothing about enforcement and as
yet there are no international emissions enforcers to act as judge, jury and
executioner.
We can opt out of Kyoto whenever we like or, like most other countries,
pretend to support the protocol and, at the same time, do little or nothing.
These statements and government policies on greenhouse gases, carbon trading
and promoting renewable energy are based on the beliefs that the world is
warming due to man-made greenhouse gases; that promoting renewable energy
will make a substantial difference to New Zealand>s greenhouse gas
emissions; and that if New Zealand reduces its greenhouse gas emissions it
would affect the world climate. All these beliefs are not true.
The evidence is unequivocal. Measurable, let alone dangerous, manmade global
warming is not happening, and is not likely to happen in the future. The
major cause for concern is the possibility of severe cooling.
Global climate has always changed and recent climate changes are not
unusual. The world was warmer in the mediaeval warm period, in the Roman
warm period and on many occasions before then. During these periods
agriculture and civilisations flourished. During cold periods like the
little ice age there was famine, plague and war.
Both surface temperature records and the much more accurate records from
satellite observations show there was a brief warming period from 1975-98.
Since then, the world has cooled and is now at the same temperature it was
in 1995. Nobody knows when, or if, world temperatures might increase.
Since the research for the 2007 IPCC report was completed in mid 2006,
researchers have discovered that warming since 1975 is not caused by
greenhouse gases. Greenhouse gas warming would be at a maximum 10,000m above
the tropics.
Observations from balloons and satellites have shown that warming is not
happening. Therefore greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide are not a major
factor in the world climate. This fact alone is sufficient to sink the
manmade global warming hypothesis.
Computer-based climate models provide the only "evidence" supporting claims
that the world is warming, that it will be dangerous, that there will be
rapid rises in sea levels and the like, yet these same models failed to
predict the temperature peak in 1998 and the steady cooling trend that set
in from 2002.
It is obvious that the models have failed to predict major climatic events
such as El Nino (1998) and La Nina (2007-08).
The models are not an accurate representation of the world climate system
and their input data is inaccurate, therefore their outputs are worthless.
This fact alone is sufficient to sink the manmade global warming hypothesis.
It is often claimed that because a "consensus" of scientists agree that
manmade global warming is happening, it must be true. This is nonsense for
two reasons. The first is that many distinguished scientists strongly
disagree. So, by definition, there is no consensus.
But even if a consensus did exist, it would make no difference to the real
world. For instance, it would not be hard to find a consensus of reverends
who firmly believe the world was created a few thousand years ago. But the
existence of this consensus would not stop evolution in its tracks. Science
is about evidence and facts, not beliefs.
Carbon dioxide is, most definitely, not a pollutant. It is as essential to
life on earth as is oxygen or water. Pollutants are, by definition,
something that we would be better off without. Without carbon dioxide most
of the life on earth would die within a few weeks.
But there is one fact that we can be sure of: the moderate increase in
carbon dioxide in the last 100 years or so has benefited mankind because it
has boosted plant growth and food production by at least 15 per cent.
More evidence is gathering that the sun, not greenhouse gases, drives our
climate. Records going back thousands of years show a close correlation
between sunspots and climate.
The theory is that sunspot- related effects influence the number of
high-energy cosmic rays reaching the atmosphere and that these cosmic rays
affect cloud formation.
Very soon, a major experiment will be set up to test this theory. If it is
shown to be correct, that alone will be sufficient to sink the hypothesis of
manmade global warming.
There have been very few sunspots over the past few years and the next
sunspot cycle, 24, is beginning but weak.
History tells us that such circumstances are associated with quite severe
cooling, possibly similar to the little ice age.
If this happens, the present financial upheavals will be exacerbated by
reduced agricultural output, stormy weather and, possibly, famine.
There is more authoritative scientific information in the report Nature, Not
Human Activity, Rules the Climate at the website http:/
/nzclimatescience.net.
http://co2sceptics.com/news.php?id=2069
Warmest Regards
Bonzo |
|
| |
|
 Back to top |
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 7:57 am Post subject: Re: Sunspots Spell End Of Climate Myth |
|
|
On Nov 11, 8:48 pm, dangdangdoodle <not...@twankers.com> wrote:
[quote]bullshit, there>s actually more evidence now that global warming is real
and happening now.
In article <491a53a...@dnews.tpgi.com.au>, "bznoo" <bz...@s.com> wrote:
Stuff.co.nz
November 11 2008
QUOTE: Computer-based climate models provide the only "evidence" supporting
claims that the world is warming, that it will be dangerous, that there will
be rapid rises in sea levels and the like, yet these same models failed to
predict the temperature peak in 1998 and the steady cooling trend that set
in from 2002.
It is disturbing that many recent statements on climate change by
influential people are not supported by hard evidence......
For instance, Professor Ralph Chapman>s statement that the globe risks a
tipping point if emissions are not reduced by 2015 is unsupported by hard
evidence, as is David Parker>s claim that if we do nothing to reduce
emissions, New Zealand could be up to $500 million worse off by 2012.
This is not true because, if we adopt the Emissions Trading Scheme,
electricity bills alone will increase by more than $500 million each year.
On Kyoto, lawyer Alistair Hercus recently claimed that "as a country we have
to pay". In fact, the Kyoto protocol says nothing about enforcement and as
yet there are no international emissions enforcers to act as judge, jury and
executioner.
We can opt out of Kyoto whenever we like or, like most other countries,
pretend to support the protocol and, at the same time, do little or nothing.
These statements and government policies on greenhouse gases, carbon trading
and promoting renewable energy are based on the beliefs that the world is
warming due to man-made greenhouse gases; that promoting renewable energy
will make a substantial difference to New Zealand>s greenhouse gas
emissions; and that if New Zealand reduces its greenhouse gas emissions it
would affect the world climate. All these beliefs are not true.
The evidence is unequivocal. Measurable, let alone dangerous, manmade global
warming is not happening, and is not likely to happen in the future. The
major cause for concern is the possibility of severe cooling.
Global climate has always changed and recent climate changes are not
unusual. The world was warmer in the mediaeval warm period, in the Roman
warm period and on many occasions before then. During these periods
agriculture and civilisations flourished. During cold periods like the
little ice age there was famine, plague and war.
Both surface temperature records and the much more accurate records from
satellite observations show there was a brief warming period from 1975-98.
Since then, the world has cooled and is now at the same temperature it was
in 1995. Nobody knows when, or if, world temperatures might increase.
Since the research for the 2007 IPCC report was completed in mid 2006,
researchers have discovered that warming since 1975 is not caused by
greenhouse gases. Greenhouse gas warming would be at a maximum 10,000m above
the tropics.
Observations from balloons and satellites have shown that warming is not
happening. Therefore greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide are not a major
factor in the world climate. This fact alone is sufficient to sink the
manmade global warming hypothesis.
Computer-based climate models provide the only "evidence" supporting claims
that the world is warming, that it will be dangerous, that there will be
rapid rises in sea levels and the like, yet these same models failed to
predict the temperature peak in 1998 and the steady cooling trend that set
in from 2002.
It is obvious that the models have failed to predict major climatic events
such as El Nino (1998) and La Nina (2007-08).
The models are not an accurate representation of the world climate system
and their input data is inaccurate, therefore their outputs are worthless.
This fact alone is sufficient to sink the manmade global warming hypothesis.
It is often claimed that because a "consensus" of scientists agree that
manmade global warming is happening, it must be true. This is nonsense for
two reasons. The first is that many distinguished scientists strongly
disagree. So, by definition, there is no consensus.
But even if a consensus did exist, it would make no difference to the real
world. For instance, it would not be hard to find a consensus of reverends
who firmly believe the world was created a few thousand years ago. But the
existence of this consensus would not stop evolution in its tracks. Science
is about evidence and facts, not beliefs.
Carbon dioxide is, most definitely, not a pollutant. It is as essential to
life on earth as is oxygen or water. Pollutants are, by definition,
something that we would be better off without. Without carbon dioxide most
of the life on earth would die within a few weeks.
But there is one fact that we can be sure of: the moderate increase in
carbon dioxide in the last 100 years or so has benefited mankind because it
has boosted plant growth and food production by at least 15 per cent.
More evidence is gathering that the sun, not greenhouse gases, drives our
climate. Records going back thousands of years show a close correlation
between sunspots and climate.
The theory is that sunspot- related effects influence the number of
high-energy cosmic rays reaching the atmosphere and that these cosmic rays
affect cloud formation.
Very soon, a major experiment will be set up to test this theory. If it is
shown to be correct, that alone will be sufficient to sink the hypothesis of
manmade global warming.
There have been very few sunspots over the past few years and the next
sunspot cycle, 24, is beginning but weak.
History tells us that such circumstances are associated with quite severe
cooling, possibly similar to the little ice age.
If this happens, the present financial upheavals will be exacerbated by
reduced agricultural output, stormy weather and, possibly, famine.
There is more authoritative scientific information in the report Nature, Not
Human Activity, Rules the Climate at the website http:/
/nzclimatescience.net.
http://co2sceptics.com/news.php?id=2069
Warmest Regards
Bonzo
-- the dang
"To those who would tear the world down, we will defeat you." Obama- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
[/quote]
SMELL MY FARTS BOZO |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
dangdangdoodle
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 7:57 am Post subject: Re: Sunspots Spell End Of Climate Myth |
|
|
bullshit, there>s actually more evidence now that global warming is real
and happening now.
In article <491a53ad$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au>, "bznoo" <bznoo@s.com> wrote:
[quote]Stuff.co.nz
November 11 2008
QUOTE: Computer-based climate models provide the only "evidence" supporting
claims that the world is warming, that it will be dangerous, that there will
be rapid rises in sea levels and the like, yet these same models failed to
predict the temperature peak in 1998 and the steady cooling trend that set
in from 2002.
It is disturbing that many recent statements on climate change by
influential people are not supported by hard evidence......
For instance, Professor Ralph Chapman>s statement that the globe risks a
tipping point if emissions are not reduced by 2015 is unsupported by hard
evidence, as is David Parker>s claim that if we do nothing to reduce
emissions, New Zealand could be up to $500 million worse off by 2012.
This is not true because, if we adopt the Emissions Trading Scheme,
electricity bills alone will increase by more than $500 million each year.
On Kyoto, lawyer Alistair Hercus recently claimed that "as a country we have
to pay". In fact, the Kyoto protocol says nothing about enforcement and as
yet there are no international emissions enforcers to act as judge, jury and
executioner.
We can opt out of Kyoto whenever we like or, like most other countries,
pretend to support the protocol and, at the same time, do little or nothing.
These statements and government policies on greenhouse gases, carbon trading
and promoting renewable energy are based on the beliefs that the world is
warming due to man-made greenhouse gases; that promoting renewable energy
will make a substantial difference to New Zealand>s greenhouse gas
emissions; and that if New Zealand reduces its greenhouse gas emissions it
would affect the world climate. All these beliefs are not true.
The evidence is unequivocal. Measurable, let alone dangerous, manmade global
warming is not happening, and is not likely to happen in the future. The
major cause for concern is the possibility of severe cooling.
Global climate has always changed and recent climate changes are not
unusual. The world was warmer in the mediaeval warm period, in the Roman
warm period and on many occasions before then. During these periods
agriculture and civilisations flourished. During cold periods like the
little ice age there was famine, plague and war.
Both surface temperature records and the much more accurate records from
satellite observations show there was a brief warming period from 1975-98.
Since then, the world has cooled and is now at the same temperature it was
in 1995. Nobody knows when, or if, world temperatures might increase.
Since the research for the 2007 IPCC report was completed in mid 2006,
researchers have discovered that warming since 1975 is not caused by
greenhouse gases. Greenhouse gas warming would be at a maximum 10,000m above
the tropics.
Observations from balloons and satellites have shown that warming is not
happening. Therefore greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide are not a major
factor in the world climate. This fact alone is sufficient to sink the
manmade global warming hypothesis.
Computer-based climate models provide the only "evidence" supporting claims
that the world is warming, that it will be dangerous, that there will be
rapid rises in sea levels and the like, yet these same models failed to
predict the temperature peak in 1998 and the steady cooling trend that set
in from 2002.
It is obvious that the models have failed to predict major climatic events
such as El Nino (1998) and La Nina (2007-08).
The models are not an accurate representation of the world climate system
and their input data is inaccurate, therefore their outputs are worthless.
This fact alone is sufficient to sink the manmade global warming hypothesis.
It is often claimed that because a "consensus" of scientists agree that
manmade global warming is happening, it must be true. This is nonsense for
two reasons. The first is that many distinguished scientists strongly
disagree. So, by definition, there is no consensus.
But even if a consensus did exist, it would make no difference to the real
world. For instance, it would not be hard to find a consensus of reverends
who firmly believe the world was created a few thousand years ago. But the
existence of this consensus would not stop evolution in its tracks. Science
is about evidence and facts, not beliefs.
Carbon dioxide is, most definitely, not a pollutant. It is as essential to
life on earth as is oxygen or water. Pollutants are, by definition,
something that we would be better off without. Without carbon dioxide most
of the life on earth would die within a few weeks.
But there is one fact that we can be sure of: the moderate increase in
carbon dioxide in the last 100 years or so has benefited mankind because it
has boosted plant growth and food production by at least 15 per cent.
More evidence is gathering that the sun, not greenhouse gases, drives our
climate. Records going back thousands of years show a close correlation
between sunspots and climate.
The theory is that sunspot- related effects influence the number of
high-energy cosmic rays reaching the atmosphere and that these cosmic rays
affect cloud formation.
Very soon, a major experiment will be set up to test this theory. If it is
shown to be correct, that alone will be sufficient to sink the hypothesis of
manmade global warming.
There have been very few sunspots over the past few years and the next
sunspot cycle, 24, is beginning but weak.
History tells us that such circumstances are associated with quite severe
cooling, possibly similar to the little ice age.
If this happens, the present financial upheavals will be exacerbated by
reduced agricultural output, stormy weather and, possibly, famine.
There is more authoritative scientific information in the report Nature, Not
Human Activity, Rules the Climate at the website http:/
/nzclimatescience.net.
http://co2sceptics.com/news.php?id=2069
Warmest Regards
Bonzo
[/quote]
-- the dang
"To those who would tear the world down, we will defeat you." Obama |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Eeyore
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 7:57 am Post subject: Re: Sunspots Spell End Of Climate Myth |
|
|
dangdangdoodle wrote:
[quote]bullshit, there>s actually more evidence now that global warming is real
and happening now.
[/quote]
No there IS NOT.
The Earth is COOLING right now. And the correlation between that and sunspot
activity is quite remarkable.
We KNOW that sunspot activity affects climate. More sunspots = hotter; fewer =
colder and recently there have been no sunspots for months.
It>s basic particle physics. Charged particles give rise to cloud formation and a
change in both planet albedo and heat trapping. See 'cloud chamber' on Wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud_chamber
See, it was THAT simple. Natural sources of CO2 vastly over-ride human output.
Graham |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
bznoo
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 7:57 am Post subject: Re: Sunspots Spell End Of Climate Myth |
|
|
"dangdangdoodle" <note-a@twankers.com> wrote in message
news:note-a-5D9874.20483311112008@news.islandnet.com...
[quote]bullshit, there>s actually more evidence now that global warming is real
and happening now.
[/quote]
Nah, as the globe rapidly cools, AGW looks more and more like a misguided
fantasy, and,
eventually, even the most rabid, agenda-driven leftie zealot
will come to his senses, as the frostbite gnaws its way up his arms and
legs!!
Warmest Regards
Bonzo
[quote]In article <491a53ad$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au>, "bznoo" <bznoo@s.com> wrote:
Stuff.co.nz
November 11 2008
QUOTE: Computer-based climate models provide the only "evidence"
supporting
claims that the world is warming, that it will be dangerous, that there
will
be rapid rises in sea levels and the like, yet these same models failed
to
predict the temperature peak in 1998 and the steady cooling trend that
set
in from 2002.
It is disturbing that many recent statements on climate change by
influential people are not supported by hard evidence......
For instance, Professor Ralph Chapman>s statement that the globe risks a
tipping point if emissions are not reduced by 2015 is unsupported by hard
evidence, as is David Parker>s claim that if we do nothing to reduce
emissions, New Zealand could be up to $500 million worse off by 2012.
This is not true because, if we adopt the Emissions Trading Scheme,
electricity bills alone will increase by more than $500 million each
year.
On Kyoto, lawyer Alistair Hercus recently claimed that "as a country we
have
to pay". In fact, the Kyoto protocol says nothing about enforcement and
as
yet there are no international emissions enforcers to act as judge, jury
and
executioner.
We can opt out of Kyoto whenever we like or, like most other countries,
pretend to support the protocol and, at the same time, do little or
nothing.
These statements and government policies on greenhouse gases, carbon
trading
and promoting renewable energy are based on the beliefs that the world is
warming due to man-made greenhouse gases; that promoting renewable energy
will make a substantial difference to New Zealand>s greenhouse gas
emissions; and that if New Zealand reduces its greenhouse gas emissions
it
would affect the world climate. All these beliefs are not true.
The evidence is unequivocal. Measurable, let alone dangerous, manmade
global
warming is not happening, and is not likely to happen in the future. The
major cause for concern is the possibility of severe cooling.
Global climate has always changed and recent climate changes are not
unusual. The world was warmer in the mediaeval warm period, in the Roman
warm period and on many occasions before then. During these periods
agriculture and civilisations flourished. During cold periods like the
little ice age there was famine, plague and war.
Both surface temperature records and the much more accurate records from
satellite observations show there was a brief warming period from
1975-98.
Since then, the world has cooled and is now at the same temperature it
was
in 1995. Nobody knows when, or if, world temperatures might increase.
Since the research for the 2007 IPCC report was completed in mid 2006,
researchers have discovered that warming since 1975 is not caused by
greenhouse gases. Greenhouse gas warming would be at a maximum 10,000m
above
the tropics.
Observations from balloons and satellites have shown that warming is not
happening. Therefore greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide are not a
major
factor in the world climate. This fact alone is sufficient to sink the
manmade global warming hypothesis.
Computer-based climate models provide the only "evidence" supporting
claims
that the world is warming, that it will be dangerous, that there will be
rapid rises in sea levels and the like, yet these same models failed to
predict the temperature peak in 1998 and the steady cooling trend that
set
in from 2002.
It is obvious that the models have failed to predict major climatic
events
such as El Nino (1998) and La Nina (2007-08).
The models are not an accurate representation of the world climate system
and their input data is inaccurate, therefore their outputs are
worthless.
This fact alone is sufficient to sink the manmade global warming
hypothesis.
It is often claimed that because a "consensus" of scientists agree that
manmade global warming is happening, it must be true. This is nonsense
for
two reasons. The first is that many distinguished scientists strongly
disagree. So, by definition, there is no consensus.
But even if a consensus did exist, it would make no difference to the
real
world. For instance, it would not be hard to find a consensus of
reverends
who firmly believe the world was created a few thousand years ago. But
the
existence of this consensus would not stop evolution in its tracks.
Science
is about evidence and facts, not beliefs.
Carbon dioxide is, most definitely, not a pollutant. It is as essential
to
life on earth as is oxygen or water. Pollutants are, by definition,
something that we would be better off without. Without carbon dioxide
most
of the life on earth would die within a few weeks.
But there is one fact that we can be sure of: the moderate increase in
carbon dioxide in the last 100 years or so has benefited mankind because
it
has boosted plant growth and food production by at least 15 per cent.
More evidence is gathering that the sun, not greenhouse gases, drives our
climate. Records going back thousands of years show a close correlation
between sunspots and climate.
The theory is that sunspot- related effects influence the number of
high-energy cosmic rays reaching the atmosphere and that these cosmic
rays
affect cloud formation.
Very soon, a major experiment will be set up to test this theory. If it
is
shown to be correct, that alone will be sufficient to sink the hypothesis
of
manmade global warming.
There have been very few sunspots over the past few years and the next
sunspot cycle, 24, is beginning but weak.
History tells us that such circumstances are associated with quite severe
cooling, possibly similar to the little ice age.
If this happens, the present financial upheavals will be exacerbated by
reduced agricultural output, stormy weather and, possibly, famine.
There is more authoritative scientific information in the report Nature,
Not
Human Activity, Rules the Climate at the website http:/
/nzclimatescience.net.
http://co2sceptics.com/news.php?id=2069
Warmest Regards
Bonzo
-- the dang
"To those who would tear the world down, we will defeat you." Obama[/quote] |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Lloyd
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 4:02 pm Post subject: Re: Sunspots Spell End Of Climate Myth |
|
|
On Nov 12, 12:41 am, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
[quote]dangdangdoodle wrote:
bullshit, there>s actually more evidence now that global warming is real
and happening now.
No there IS NOT.
The Earth is COOLING right now. And the correlation between that and sunspot
activity is quite remarkable.
[/quote]
There>s a poster here that claims correlation between the sunspot
activity and the stock market too. Wanna claim sun spots influence
the Dow Jones?
[quote]
We KNOW that sunspot activity affects climate. More sunspots = hotter; fewer > colder and recently there have been no sunspots for months.
It>s basic particle physics. Charged particles give rise to cloud formation and a
change in both planet albedo and heat trapping. See 'cloud chamber' on Wikipedia.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud_chamber
[/quote]
Debunked by several papers in those "scientific journals" you don>t
read.
[quote]See, it was THAT simple. Natural sources of CO2 vastly over-ride human output.
Graham
[/quote]
Get a freshman chem book and look up "equilibrium." |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Ouroboros_Rex
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 9:44 pm Post subject: Re: Sunspots Spell End Of Climate Myth |
|
|
bznoo wrote:
[quote]Stuff.co.nz
November 11 2008
QUOTE: Computer-based climate models provide the only "evidence"
supporting claims that the world is warming,
[/quote]
A ridiculous lie. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Ouroboros_Rex
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 9:44 pm Post subject: Re: Sunspots Spell End Of Climate Myth |
|
|
bznoo wrote:
[quote]"dangdangdoodle" <note-a@twankers.com> wrote in message
news:note-a-5D9874.20483311112008@news.islandnet.com...
bullshit, there>s actually more evidence now that global warming is
real and happening now.
Nah, as the globe rapidly cools,
[/quote]
A ridiculous lie. lol |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Tom P
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 13, 2008 4:03 am Post subject: Re: Sunspots Spell End Of Climate Myth |
|
|
bznoo wrote:
[quote]Stuff.co.nz
November 11 2008
QUOTE: Computer-based climate models provide the only "evidence" supporting
claims that the world is warming, that it will be dangerous, that there will
be rapid rises in sea levels and the like, yet these same models failed to
predict the temperature peak in 1998 and the steady cooling trend that set
in from 2002.
Are you saying this will continue forever? What happens when the sunspot[/quote]
cycle reverses and hits the next maximum in a few years? |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
bznoo
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 13, 2008 7:57 am Post subject: Re: Sunspots Spell End Of Climate Myth |
|
|
"Tom P" <tombnbnb@freenet.dd> wrote in message
news:6o125cF1b235U2@mid.individual.net...
[quote]bznoo wrote:
Stuff.co.nz
November 11 2008
QUOTE: Computer-based climate models provide the only "evidence"
supporting claims that the world is warming, that it will be dangerous,
that there will be rapid rises in sea levels and the like, yet these same
models failed to predict the temperature peak in 1998 and the steady
cooling trend that set in from 2002.
Are you saying this will continue forever? What happens when the sunspot
cycle reverses and hits the next maximum in a few years?
[/quote]
Yes, cyclical climate patterns will continue forever.
CO2 is just a scam.
Warmest Regards
Bonzo |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
|
