Man-Made Global Warming Theory Takes Major Hit

There is a 10,000 year Holocene timeline.

 

Are you actually claiming that the Maunder Minimum caused the Medieval Warm Period ??? That’s hilarious.

 

No I am not

Ps your trolling has been reported

 

She brought up the Maunder Minimum in response to your question:

 

How did the Maunder Minimum cause the MWP?

 

It didn't. She was obviously only addressing the LIA. But you know this, of course.

 

Which is entirely typical of these conversations. Link to talking head that yammers endlessly about facts talking head knows nothing about, or could prove factually if they had to. Then, revert to "i put in a link" endlessly like you failed to address the undisputed facts contained within...

When you can find a funding motive for every citation provided, it isn't hard to understand why the continuation of the hoax is so important, financially, to those organizations that have found far more success begging for allocations premised on the apocalypse than actual scientific exploration, like space.... The fact that NASA has almost entirely forgotten what they actually are supposed to be doing, and have reverted to easy money grabbing is embarrassing these days.

 

That is what alarmists do. They avoid the fact that there have been 9 previous warming periods in the Holocene. The extreme excitement over the Mann hockey stick was that it got rid of the MWP. They then hid the decline in the 20th century.

 

I stumbled upon a graph recently showing a TSI-reconstruction (and future projection) going back about 1,000 years from Shapiro et al (2011). For a description of the graph, see here. The LIA was likely due to low solar activity (1700) and the MWP (1200) coincides with high solar activity. Notice that it shows TSI increasing from 1700 to 2000. Could the warming from 1700 to 2000 be due to the Sun then?

​

 

What excites me a lot is knowing we do have genuine scientists who did not give up on researching what is really happening. They are not content to mock people for asking things such as : what is going on with our Clouds globally? But Curry this time takes on ocean events.

https://judithcurry.com/2019/07/21/geothermal-ocean-warming-discussion-thread/#more-25017

Geothermal ocean warming discussion thread
by curryja
by Judith Curry

"The atmosphere bias of climate science makes it impossible for them to see geological forces and therefore, impossible for them to understand the earth’s climate." - Thongchai

Read more of this post

When conducting the literature survey for my report on sea level rise [link; see section 4.2], I became intrigued by under-ocean heat sources.

“Wunsch (201 identified lower bounds on uncertainties in ocean temperature trends for the period 1994-2013. The trend in integrated ocean temperature was estimated by Wunsch to be 0.011 ± 0.001 oC/decade (note: this rate of warming is much less than the surface warming, owing to the large volume of ocean water). This corresponds to a 20- year average ocean heating rate of 0.48 ±0.1 W/m2 of which 0.1 W/m2 arises from the geothermal forcing. I have rarely seen geothermal forcing (e.g. underwater volcanoes) mentioned as a source of ocean warming – the numbers cited by Wunsch reflect nearly a 20% contribution by geothermal forcing to overall global ocean warming over the past two decades.”

Makes me wonder how much of the TOA radiative energy imbalance calculated from ocean heat content reflects seafloor geothermal heat fluxes?

Climate modelers are beginning to pay attention to seafloor geothermal fluxes. The first such study that I’ve spotted is Adcroft et al. (2012), using a uniform geothermal heat flux of 50 mW/m2 through the sea floor. They found substantial changes in deep circulation to this heat flux.

 

Read the free book. It covers a lot of this. The sun is the source of energy which heats the earth and the oceans are basically an energy storage reservoir having ~ 1000 X the capacity of the atmosphere.

 

The statements were correct. The Thames froze over regularly in the LIA, but wine grapes were grown in Britain during the MWP.

 

Exactly. The hockey stick has caused the alarmists to completely erase any history of the MWP and LIA.

 

So, you are willing to know the fact that solar variance clearly caused half a dozen previous warm-cold cycles in the Holocene, but somehow the sustained high solar activity in the last 3/4 of the 20th century -- following the sustained low of the LIA -- couldn't have caused the late 20th century to be warmer than the 19th and early 20th centuries???

 

Please do so

I have seen this conspiracy theory claim but nothing to back it

Now are you going to tell me that the 12,000 citations quoted in the WG2 report were ALL TIED TO A “FUNDING MOTIVE”?

https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/03/IPCC_WG2AR5_FactSheet.pdf

All 1700 reviewers had a higher motive?

This is only ONE working group of the IPCC

 

And they have all made careers and accumulated personal wealth from writing government funded pal reviewed global warming scientific papers. Eisenhower warned against this very thing.

Why does the IPCC completely ignore the previous 9 warming & cooling cycles of the Holocene ?? Our current warming is no different from the previous 9. Why doesn’t the IPCC acknowledge this ???

 

The way it was written it sounded as though those things happened simultaneously

As for wine growing. Britain grows wine today. Wine growing is NOT a good indicator of current climate trends

 

You are not going to get a response from me until you are specific

 

Yep!

Got science?


https://www.ucsusa.org/global-warming/science-and-impacts/science/effect-of-sun-on-climate-faq.html

 

http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?help/terms

Directing someone to an open source non peer reviewed book is NOT an acceptable way of validating your point

Again I am letting you know, out of courtesy, that your future posts doing so will be ignored by me.

 

Who pays their salaries. All of them. That’s exactly specific.

 

The book is free and written by a PhD oceanographer. It has over 600 footnoted references to peer reviewed scientific papers. I’ve given you and everyone else the link to the free book who’s in pdf format which has search, highlighting, notes, and all other pdf functions. This is what you are ignoring.

 

Sounded like it happened simultaneously ?? That’s absurd. The LIA followed the MWP.

Today we are in a global warming period today just as we were in the MWP.

 

Where are the same plots for the LIA, MWP, Roman WP, and Minoan WP not to mention the other 6 warming and cooling periods ??

 

That's correct, the _net_ flow of energy. Heat is a statistical quantity which is meaningless on the scale of single molecules. Single molecules are free to radiate energy in any direction, including towards warmer objects.

Thus, claiming that global warming defies the 2nd law is a moron statement. That's not debatable. Your idiot conspiracy cult is trying to rewrite the last century of physics.

Unsupported conspiracy gibberish. I bet it makes you feel very important, though. Gives you a warm fuzzy to think that you're a brave freedom fighter with special knowledge. One seriously special snowflake, you are. That's what the cult tells you. It's how cults get members, by giving them warm fuzzies.

Everything you gave was a meaningless anecdote.

Again, take away 90% of the network, the results are the same. That proves it's very robust. That's not arguable. Your fallacy of incredulity doesn't change that.

Fallacy of incredulity again. There's a lot written on this. I could link to, but you wouldn't read it (your cult forbids that as heresy), and you couldn't understand it anyways.