Gore's Own Inconvenient Truths....

[Phlegmak]

I think he means Global warming - a well supported Scientific theory. The religion of the right of course is Creationism - a load of ********.

I was joking.

By the way:
Linky

Linky #2

 

[Norlamand]

And your basis for that absurd claim is...

The fact that cycles of global warming have followed the solar cycles of thermal output for eons and correlate far better, and for far longer, than does the activity or even existance of man. A simple examination of the record of global temperature fluctuations and that of solar activity such as sunspots shows a stunning correlation that dates back far beyond the industrial revolution.

 

[El_Machinae]

I must be confused.

We have a record of sunspot activity going back before the Industrial Revolution?

 

[MobBoss]

I must be confused.

We have a record of sunspot activity going back before the Industrial Revolution?

Actually, I read something online about this not long ago. Apparently people have been counting these things for hundreds of years.

Telescopes been around awhile ya know.

 

[Norlamand]

There are sunspot records going back to the 1600's and proxy measurements based on various metrics (Carbon 14 being common as it is produced by solar radiation effects on nitrogen in the atmosphere).

 

[Urederra]

From wikipedia, the oracle of our era, wiki for friends and family

The longest recorded aspect of solar variations are changes in sunspots. The first record of sunspots dates to around 800 BC in China and the oldest surviving drawing of a sunspot dates to 1128. In 1610, astronomers began using the telescope to make observations of sunspots and their motions. Initial study was focused on their nature and behavior.[4] Although the physical aspects of sunspots were not identified until the 1900s, observations continued. Study was hampered during the 1600s and 1700s due to the low number of sunspots during what is now recognized as an extended period of low solar activity, this event named the Maunder Minimum. By the 1800s records of their numbers began to show variations in their numbers.

Solar variation has probably been the cause of some climate change, for example during the Maunder minimum.

EDIT: I wanted to add a graph showing solar spot variation.

EDIT2: And I just wanted to quote this sentence from the article

The level of solar activity during the past 70 years is exceptional - the last period of similar magnitude occurred over 8,000 years ago. The Sun was at a similarly high level of magnetic activity for only ~10% of the past 11,400 years, and almost all of the earlier high-activity periods were shorter than the present episode

 

[Xenocrates]

i just found this: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/08/14/MNGCIKHTRQ1.DTL

Gore has a TV station where viewers can send their own material for broadcast. This guy is no sap. Seriously, whether or not you believe him on global warming, he's got some intelligence, courage and foresight.

I think, unless there's a major attempt to sabotage him (which there is, sadly) he could turn the US around. I mean, what kind of President do you want, one that stakes his reputation on an environmental cause and takes on big oil, or one that dances to the tune of the lobbyists?

 

[MobBoss]

i just found this: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/08/14/MNGCIKHTRQ1.DTL

Gore has a TV station where viewers can send their own material for broadcast. This guy is no sap. Seriously, whether or not you believe him on global warming, he's got some intelligence, courage and foresight.

I think, unless there's a major attempt to sabotage him (which there is, sadly) he could turn the US around. I mean, what kind of President do you want, one that stakes his reputation on an environmental cause and takes on big oil, or one that dances to the tune of the lobbyists?

I want a president that has honor. Gore has no honor. Case in point. During the election Gore actually phoned Bush earlier in the night and conceded to him on the phone. Then reneged when his advisors told him Florida might be too close to call.

He is just a opportunistic weasel and I will forever view him as such.

Xeno, what you fail to see is that he is indeed simply dancing to a lobbys tune. No more. No less.

 

[Xenocrates]

I want a president that has honor. Gore has no honor. Case in point. During the election Gore actually phoned Bush earlier in the night and conceded to him on the phone. Then reneged when his advisors told him Florida might be too close to call.

He is just a opportunistic weasel and I will forever view him as such.

Xeno, what you fail to see is that he is indeed simply dancing to a lobbys tune. No more. No less.

I didn't know that. If it's true I'll consider reconsidering!

I thought Gore publicly conceded even though he had a decent case for the crown?

You know more about it than me so you may be right.

 

[brennan]

I want a president that has honor. Gore has no honor. Case in point. During the election Gore actually phoned Bush earlier in the night and conceded to him on the phone. Then reneged when his advisors told him Florida might be too close to call.

He is just a opportunistic weasel and I will forever view him as such.

Xeno, what you fail to see is that he is indeed simply dancing to a lobbys tune. No more. No less.

Wow, so he changed his mind when given new information. This is the essence of Pure Evil is it not?

 

[Gothmog]

First my own opinion on Gore's movie: haven't seen it.

I understand from a review in Physics Today that it is a bit sensationalistic, but that it gets the majority of the science right.

Personally, I don't blame Gore for living in a couple nice houses or in an otherwise energy intensive way; and I find the green energy charge quite ridiculous.

Norlamand wrote:

The fact that cycles of global warming have followed the solar cycles of thermal output for eons and correlate far better, and for far longer, than does the activity or even existance of man. A simple examination of the record of global temperature fluctuations and that of solar activity such as sunspots shows a stunning correlation that dates back far beyond the industrial revolution.

You're mixing topics here just so you know.

The really stunning correlation is on a very long time scale and has nothing to do with sunspots, but with the geometric realities of our orbit around the sun; i.e. the milankovitch cycles - and actually they are not that stunning unless 'filtered' correctly. These are very long time scales (tens to hundreds of thousands of years) and not relevant to current short time scale warming.

I've debunked the sunspot correlations (i.e. the lassen curve) a number of times on this site: here's an example - http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=2527451&postcount=200, and the follow up posts. There's more in other threads.

Then later in that same thread I note that good climate models do take solar irradiance into account and that it is necessary but not sufficient to reproduce the last 150 years of temperature trends. You must add anthropogenic effects too.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=2560752&postcount=358

Actually volcanoes are more important on that timescale.

Some scientific consensus links:
AGU: http://www.agu.org/sci_soc/policy/po...e_change.shtml
AMS: http://www.ourplanet.com/aaas/pages/atmos02.html
AIP: http://www.aip.org/gov/policy12.html

Oh and @Urederra, I know from our previous discussions that you are very critical of the Mann et al. temperature reconstructions. I assume you've followed the senate hearing on the topic - that circus act that discussed 8 year old results as if the scientific method didn't exist?

Well, as I'm sure you know, they found that the basic message of the reconstruction holds. They did discuss some of the statistical anomalies (i.e. the bootstrapping and wavelet techniques used), as has been done in the open literature (and as we have done before), and it was found there the most salient features of the Mann et al. temperature reconstructions hold.

Of course this is well known in the scientific community as it has been the subject of much debate, oh and there was extensive review by the IPCC, oh yeah and that whole National Academies report that came out this earlier year...

http://www.nap.edu/catalog/11676.html

and before you ask. Yes both the Little Ice Age and the Medieval Warm period are addressed; and yes publications by McIntyre were included in the analysis. There have been a good deal of improvements since the original Mann paper, many published by Mann et al.

But I know you were interested specifically in politicians views on science, from our previous discussions.

That's a nice plot of sunspot observations, but do you see how the sunspot number (and solar forcing in the milankovitch plot) has been going down recently, while global temperatures have been doing the opposite?