Amazingly, @organic red is as thick as you, I never thought it possible 2 people could be that stupid given how few read this thread 400 years of solar activity and he says "snow in one winter" while pretending we were not told snow would disappear for 30 years yep this has nothing to do with it, sure please log in to view this image
http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20160127-will-snow-become-a-thing-of-the-past-as-the-climate-warms "will-snow-become-a-thing-of-the-past-as-the-climate-warms" 30 years of this ****e
please log in to view this image a decade later please log in to view this image please log in to view this image Snow needs cold.. not warming, an overheating planet does not create more cold you dipshit
England's temperatures in the longest running record CET @astro you challenged numtpy please log in to view this image
Oooohh............I got some Sisu abuse Morning mate ...........I don't remember hearing the 'no more snow' stuff. I do remember hearing that all forms of weather would be more severe, which seems to be the case. You will not convince me there is nothing to worry about on this topic, I think we are in big trouble. Anyway, you're an oil shill so..........
No point in rebutting you since there are numerous sources out there you could find yourself if you put even 10 seconds of thought into investigating it. Instead you go #fullsisu and resort to insults while doubling down on posting links to anti-science nonsense as if it increases your credibility rather than absolutely demolishing it.
#talkshite New radio show. Brain dead cabbage Pretending you are not a massive hypocrite by ignoring the glaring hypocrisy. Pretending the failed 3 decades of predictions based on the theory never happened. If your predictions are wrong, your theory is wrong, you anti science nitwit Pretending you didnt claim the floods a few years ago was "global warming" while then claiming I say a snowy year means no global warming #retard Only a ****** says "fossil fuel apologist" while said ****** enjoys the benefits of fossil fuels, you stupid ****
Who knew a better correlation for temperatures than CO2 would #trigger @astro The illiterate had to bring it down to the level of eco mut loons and tin foil hat conspiracy theories of fossil fuel apologists, while might I add using fossil fuels to vent his illiterate rage
Skeptical science, @astro go to guys for #science please log in to view this image Solar Irradiance is not "solar activity", irradiance is but one aspect of solar activity They don't show which temperature time series that is either as there are 8 of them #antisciencefrauds
So tell us what type of solar activity other than the actual light is responsible for the increase in temperature. Or is the temperature increase itself fake, in which case why are you even talking about solar activity causing it? #sortyourstoryout
It's like you never heard of "solar variation", look it up you illiterate. solar magnetic variation, then there is the cycle variations in extreme UV (which effects Ozone levels) for example. Then there is heliosphere variation, solar wind pressure, all of while also affect earth, just some of the changes in cycles. Solar magnetic activity also affects the jet stream.. When you say temperature, what do you mean? Do you mean a specific time series or do you mean average measurement of kinetic energy.. "temperature" in this context is meaningless You have not a clue of that which struggle in vein to speak of It's like talking to a cat about things 14 year olds understand
Ah re convenience, no one has to drive, or fly away on holidays, no one has to brush their teeth with oil based plastic tooth brushes, no one has to use plastic bottles, no one has to buy stuff shipped in from a thousand miles away, no one has to own an iphone or Android, no one has to own a TV, no one has to do a lot of things that they do using fossil fuels to make life convenient. Don't agree with you one jot, apologist crap, you DONT HAVE to post here using fossil fuels. lmfao The climate scientists dont have to fly biz class all over the world do they? not with modern networks, the UN does not HAVE to have 1200 private jets fly to climate parties like Cancun and Morocco and if you read the "commitments" in the climate Paris Accord, no one committed **** all bar the US under Obama, India and China agreed to **** all
No one said EUV wasn't and it varies and has an impact other than energy balance, which is what the "light" v "temperature" debate is about. That's all you have to say huh.. one wonders why you blame floods on our 0.00001 mole fraction CO2 addition to the atmosphere when you really don't know anything at all about it, and rely on "muh authority", while not even realising there are thousands of papers that throw doubt on the claims that the theory is 1 valid and 2 a danger After all this nonsense came from the incorrect theory on why Venus is hot, if we talk forcing and energy balance, Mar's atmosphere, is 95% CO2, it's atmosphere is thinner but it's layer of CO2 is thicker than earth's, so.. by the theoretical model set out for it on earth, mars should be constantly warming up for millions of years.. and yet.. there is 0 evidence of that.
You said solar irradiance wasn't the only solar activity as an excuse for why the data shows no correlation between global temperature and solar irradiance. So I asked what type of solar activity you think is responsible for the temperature increase. You said EUV, which is part of solar irradiance. #sortyourstoryout
Gibberish, EUV variation affects the atmosphere in other ways than energy balance, so it's effect is outside of rad in rad out balance, trying to cover your ignorance. You had to google EUV as well, you moron Everything you are posting is something you google after you read my post and ignore all of the inconvenient truths. #TobesMKII #outofyourdepth #Sad
