‘The sun goes blank again during the weakest solar cycle in more than a century’


By: - Climate DepotJune 25, 2016 8:25 AM with 1256 comments

Via: http://www.vencoreweather.com/blog/2016/6/23/1015-am-the-sun-goes-blank-again-during-the-weakest-solar-cycle-in-more-than-a-century

By Meteorologist Paul Dorian – Vencore, Inc.

The latest solar image is completely spotless for the second time this month; image courtesy NASA

The latest solar image is completely spotless for the second time this month; image courtesy NASA

Overview
For the second time this month, the sun has gone completely blank.  On June 4th, the sun went completely spotless for the first time since 2011 and that quiet spell lasted for about 4 days.  Sunspot regions then reappeared for the next few weeks on a sporadic basis, but are once again completely missing from the surface of the sun.  The blank sun is a sign that the next solar minimum is approaching and there will be an increasing number of spotless days over the next few years.  At first, the blankness will stretch for just a few days at a time, then it’ll continue for weeks at a time, and finally it should last for months at a time when the sunspot cycle reaches its nadir.  The next solar minimum phase is expected to take place around 2019 or 2020. The current solar cycle is the 24th since 1755 when extensive recording of solar sunspot activity began and is the weakest in more than a century with the fewest sunspots since cycle 14 peaked in February 1906.

Sunspot numbers for solar cycles 22, 23 and 24 which shows a clear weakening trend; courtesy Dr. David Hathaway, NASA/MSFC

Sunspot numbers for solar cycles 22, 23 and 24 which shows a clear weakening trend; courtesy Dr. David Hathaway, NASA/MSFC

Solar cycle 24
We are currently more than seven years into Solar Cycle 24 and it appears the solar maximum of this cycle was reached in April 2014 during a spike in activity (current location indicated by arrow).  Going back to 1755, there have been only a few solar cycles in the previous 23 that have had a lower number of sunspots during its maximum phase.  The peak of activity in April 2014 was actually a second peak in solar cycle 24 that surpassed the level of an earlier peak which occurred in March 2012.  While many solar cycles are double-peaked, this is the first one in which the second peak in sunspot number was larger than the first peak.  The sunspot number plot (above) shows a clear weakening trend in solar cycles since solar cycle 22 peaked around 1990.

While a weak solar cycle does suggest strong solar storms will occur less often than during stronger and more active cycles, it does not rule them out entirely. In fact, the famous “superstorm” known as the Carrington Event of 1859 occurred during a weak solar cycle (number 10). In addition, there is some evidence that most large events such as strong solar flares and significant geomagnetic storms tend to occur in the declining phase of the solar cycle. In other words, there is still a chance for significant solar activity in the months and years ahead. The last solar minimum phase lasted from 2007 to 2009 and it was historically weak. In fact, it produced three of the most spotless days on the sun since the middle 1800’s (bar graph below).

Top "sunspotless" days since 1849; the last solar minimum phase produced 3 of these years

Top “sunspotless” days since 1849; the last solar minimum phase produced 3 of these years

Consequences of a solar minimum
Contrary to popular belief, solar minimum is not a period of complete quiet and inactivity as it is associated with numerous interesting changes.  First, cosmic rays surge into the inner solar system with relative ease during periods of solar minimum.  Galactic cosmic rays coming from outside the solar system must propagate upstream against the solar wind and a thicket of solar magnetic fields.  Solar wind decreases and sun’s magnetic field weakens during solar minimums making it easier for cosmic rays to reach the Earth.  This is a more dangerous time for astronauts as the increase in potent cosmic rays can easily shatter a strand of human DNA. Also, during years of lower sunspot number, the sun’s extreme ultraviolet radiation (EUV) drops and the Earth’s upper atmosphere cools and contracts. With sharply lower aerodynamic drag, satellites have less trouble staying in orbit— a good thing. On the other hand, space junk tends to accumulate, making the space around Earth a more dangerous place for astronauts.

Meteorologist Paul Dorian
Vencore, Inc.

#


  • Mike Hambuchen

    Time to buy up heating oil now before the ice age begins.

    • Ben Sokolow

      Yep they feed us distorted temperature data on their climate models they constantly shoving down our throat but don’t even talk about the sun and it’s strange cycles and activity.

      • Maven of Common Sense

        It’s almost, as if, they don’t want to admit the sun has effects on Earth’s weather.

        • working stiff

          Yep. The Earth will enter into a cooling phase. Look up the Maunder Minimum. The academic proponents of anthropogenic global warming will do anything including removal of funding if any solar scientists make any reference to the Solar minimum cooling the Earth. Money talks and your career will walk if you talk:)

          • furd

            the sad funny thing; it was some of these same “scientists” who filed the man made global cooling theory “the mini Ice Age” paperwork for science grant money starting the money for false data scheme that morphed into man made global warming. you know the idiots that declared war on “FREON” a brand name of coolant gases made by DuPont. Global man made cooling The Mini Ice AGE just 20 short years ago fraud at it’s best

        • Greg Gebhardt

          It does have an effect but when the EPS refuses to release its raw data to prove what it says . . . . Well we think they are lying. Not that our government has not lied to use before, but they have zero credibility.

          • furd

            ya, like the UFO’s and live alien they hide from the people 🙂

        • Where.Is.My.Mind

          The rebuttal I receive to the sun argument is that its already been determined (by concensus?) that the sun has no effect.

          • The Bacon Stops Here

            Get rid of the sun and what happens to earth’s climate? That’s the rebuttal to their rebuttal.

          • nikondvr

            Ding ding ding. Give that one a prize.

          • zjak10

            Yeah and a consensus is a political attribute NOT scientific. Science is based on facts as we know them today.

          • GreyGeek77

            Politics indeed! The AGW fiasco is identical to Lysenkoism in the USSR between 1930 1960.

          • Ferd Berfel

            along with about a thousand other ‘consensus’ theories gone down the drain over time

          • Shrugged

            Who said that -Obama? Thought so.

          • The sun isn’t a gas giant. We’re not even in a solar system. It is geocentric and the sun is closer than you’ve been led to believe.

          • Roscoe Bonsweenie

            Only when I’m looking in my cars review mirror

          • The Lone Ranger

            No. the passengers side view mirror. It even says that things are closer than they appear, everyone knows that…..Sheesh.

          • High on trump

            How close? Of course we are in the solar system. Take an astrophysics course in college prereqs are all calculus classes and 2 years of physics. Then you are allowed to talk

          • JBD

            If that’s true, and I am sure it isn’t, Arizona is closer to the sun than the rest of earth.

          • carloada

            ok then, we don’t need the sun…agreed, and all deniers will be executed…

          • The Lone Ranger

            They’re clearly heretics. I say off with their heads!!!

          • carloada

            ah yes, the guillotine…the reason for which the wheel was invented…

          • The Lone Ranger

            Agreed!!!

        • seenbetterdaze

          They cannot TAX the SUN!

          • moron

            They tax rain in Maryland.

          • Ferd Berfel

            now you’re getting it! UN Agenda 21 – redistribute America’s wealth to… THEM

          • J.E.Walker

            Bull***t they can’t. A creative DimocRAT can come up with a tax on anything.

          • carloada

            yes, yes…much easier than actually fixing a problem…

          • furd

            try carbonated sodas

          • Louie’sDad

            Yet.

          • David Watson

            Not yet…but Hillary has a Soros group working on it !

          • bambi_hussein

            Don’t put it past liberals to try.

        • jim

          The sun IS the reason for earth’s weather.

          • High on trump

            The earth being tilted on its axis are the reason. No seasons on other planets.

          • Zthomm

            Other planets have seasons.

          • R. A.

            Other planets have axial tilts. All of them do. Ranging from 3 degrees(Jupiter) to 170 degrees(Venus).

          • The Lone Ranger

            Don’t say that, you may face jail time!!

        • carloada

          that would mean admitting there is a higher power…

        • Ray Tort

          Earth temperature varies cyclically between warming and cooling. Some of these “astronomical harmonics models” are: 9.1 solar/lunar tidal cycle, the 11.2 year Wolf sunspot cycle, a 20 year cycle, the 60 year Jupiter/Saturn Tri-Synodic Conjunction cycle, the 2000 year solar intensity cycle and the Milankovitch cycles of 26,000, 41,000, and 100,000 years. These cycles drive oceanic oscillations (PDO, AMO, etc.) and cloud formation.

          The dominant cycle is the 60 year Jupiter/Saturn Tri-Synodic Conjunction cycle. When Jupiter and Saturn align, they change the solar system center of gravity, drawing the sun closer to the inner planets and warming them. This cycle has been traced back for years hundreds of years and thousands of years ago it was documented in Chinese and other records and pagan celebrations.

      • FrankUnderwoodSr

        When I was a kid, we were taught that ALL heat on planet earth came from the sun. The sun isn’t just a contributor, it dominates everything climate-wise, and without it, we would be nothing but a frozen rock. So yes, you are right. We never hear about the sun because the climate alarmists want to blame human activity for any changes.

        • R. A.

          The Sun: The Primary Cause of Global Warming Since 4,000,000,000 BP

      • nostudme1

        The “truth” requires common sense and intelligence. ‘Nuff said?

      • Atlanta Girl

        Just started a book about a scientist who has been studying polar bears for 40yrs and says that the population is more than 4x what it was in the 70s as well he has proven that polar bears do not exclusively eat seals, but a much broader diet than most scientists will acknowledge…(he analyzes their poop) Quite fascinating read bc we hear all he time how all science shows…

        • carloada

          now that is genuine crap science…

          • Atlanta Girl

            Yep, poo don’t lie.

  • physcitech

    Cosmic rays can also assist in cloud formation by providing nucleation sites (from ionization) for droplets to form. Clouds block incoming solar radiation, therefore cooling the atmosphere.

    • iurockhead

      Yup. Henrick Svensmark’s work, and that of others, have demonstrated that connection of solar activity and our climate. IPCC, of course, ignores it.

      • mark g.

        And let’s not forget that the most common greenhouse gas is water vapor. Total CO2 is minor in comparison.

        • R. A.

          And Greenland ice core data suggests that atmospheric CO2 is regulated by global temperatures, not the other way around as IPCC assumes.

  • next bubble

    Actually, there was spotless day in 2014, check the left hand side on:
    http://spaceweather.com/

  • James Rogers

    No doubt caused by man-made global climate change.

  • Savior of the Golden Goddesses

    It’s because of the Brexit leave vote.

    • Bob

      Very valid point.

    • nostudme1

      If the benefits of staying were so damn great, I’m sure they would have remained, and continued to support the world’s parasites. Nothing but blue skies ahead!!

    • furd

      No; no it was four blood moons that caused this

  • Joe_Keedoke

    One wonders if that’s why the last several tornado seasons have been a total flop. How many years now without an authentic fujita F3? Last F4 or 5? Tuscaloosa? I’ve put my tornado chasing equipment in storage and bought a new bowling ball.

  • Mike Lebowski

    I blame George W. Bush.

    • WBCarson

      Because he hate black people.

      • Shrugged

        Yes he do. Just ax him

        • Chris W

          He say he dindu nuffin!

        • snorkelrick

          Da sun iz racis.

    • J.E.Walker

      It will always be “BUSH’S FAULT”.., Just ask any Dim.

  • Greg Gebhardt

    So much for obama’s global warming. Back to coal to keep us warm. Just got to get him out of office.

    Hillary likely has stolen the sun spots to sell.

    • WBCarson

      Perfect time for rates to “necessarily skyrocket.”

      • cosifantutti

        Barry of “skyrocket” days remains as clueless as ever. On the immigration loss at SCOTUS, he whines wah wah wah if my nominee was in place, I woulda won. Oh really? How do you how he would have voted? Because if you traded the nomination for a deal on pending cases, that’s a crime, Mr. Constitutional “professor”

    • RayGun

      Last time a Clinton was involved in spots they were all over a blue dress. The liberals all thought that was great. They even named a 24 hour news channel after him Clinton News Network, (CNN).

      • Bevo2

        The only secret hillary tried to keep!

        • Sari Thackner

          Classic !

        • Todd

          Asia for the Asians, Africa for the Africans, White places for Everybody?

          When is diversity or mass immigration or so-called anti racism ever demanded of any non white peoples anywhere?

          If diversity is such a strength, why is this “gift” given to European populations only, when there are so many non white populations that
          “need” it much more?

          Diversity means chasing down the last white person.

          It’s white Ge no cide

          • mikekelley10

            Federal-mandated diversity is great for lefty politicians but not so much for little girls:

            –The Obama-appointed U.S. attorney for Idaho has taken the highly unusual step of intervening in a local criminal case involving an alleged sexual assault by juvenile Muslim migrants and threatened the community and media with federal prosecution if they “spread false information or inflammatory statements about the perpetrators.”

            WND and other news outlets have reported on the case involving three juvenile boys, two from Sudan and one from Iraq, who allegedly sexually assaulted a 5-year-old special-needs girl in the laundry room of the Fawnbrook Apartments in Twin Falls, Idaho.

            The incident occurred on June 2, but did not come to light until more than two weeks later when stories began to swirl on social media.

            The two older boys from Sudan were arrested on June 17 and released from juvenile detention less than a week later on June 23 pending further court proceedings.–

            http://mobile.wnd.com/2016/06/explosive-new-twist-in-idaho-sex-assault-case/

          • AppalachianHeathen

            Well, if they are guilty without a doubt, the community has the responsibility to snuff them out! Where they’ve come from, the communities stone people to death for whatever the imam decides! Raping a five year old is probably just a misdmeanor in their culture! I have no faith in government sponsered diversity either! Government sucks a protectiing the good people and innocents!

          • MissV

            Then I guess that the US military personnel that raped the Japanese woman needs to be snuffed out as well, correct? Let’s not forget all the military females that have been raped by their male counterparts as well. Let’s snuff all of them out as well, especially since the US military does not hold themselves any more accountable than the rest of this POS government! Why don’t you tell our Saudi supporting government and all the George Bushes of the world to hold Saudi Arabia RESPONSIBLE for 9-11 then I will believe in the USA. USA of HYPOCRISY.

          • AppalachianHeathen

            Well, if they are guilty without a doubt; then yes, they should be snuffed as well! As a a minimum they should get their johnny wacked off, because not all societies have capital punishment! Maybe the victim should be able to decide! Unfortunately for you, I’m not the one that can help you! And, I’m not your hypocrit!

          • Allan

            White society is like a canvas for other to piss on, oh, I mean paint on.

          • AppalachianHeathen

            Classic statement, although we do have our own share of piss stains, I mean golden paint sploshes, on the white canvas. However, since the massive influx of these middle easterners and others began in such high numbers, the crap stains, I mean brown paint sploshes, on the white canvas are overtaking the golden ones! No culture is perfect, but their’s is certainly several hundred centuries behind! More like jackasswards I’d say!

            Fight back America and Europe, don’t take this crap on your white canvas!

          • MediaMike

            They aren’t getting here on their own! The CIA and State Dept. are directly responsible for this crime against America’s women.

          • MissV

            Do you really think these people want to be in a society of haters? I apologize to each and every one of the Muslims, Iranians, Iraqis, Africans, and all the rest of the races around the world that our USA government is 100% RESPONSIBLE for the turmoil in their countries. How many countries call other countries TERRORIST, and then go arming every terrorist nation in the world with the only thing the USA knows how to make and that is WEAPONS to MURDER innocent people for rich, white men and women’s greed. It SUCKS to be an American! I am waiting for the takeover by any country, can’t be as lame as the US government.

          • AppalachianHeathen

            I think you’re misdirecting your rage. You’re preaching to the chior as
            far as I’m concerned, and making alot of assumptions that you’re the
            only one that cares! Unfortunately Mr. Trump is the only candidate that might be able to make positive change on a road to recovery as a nation! There are others, but they don’t stand to get elected. If Mr. Trump cannot be our tool for positive change, then the gig is up! Afterall, as you well know we’re long overdue!

          • AppalachianHeathen

            Good and interesting points, something that would never make it into a liberal’s space filled mind! Liberals don’t have pea brains as some have claimed; they have these huge space filled ones where you used to be able to fly a kite or bottle rockets! But now-a-days you can send off rocket ships in there to other realms of their fantasy universes. Kites, to Bottle Rockets, to Rocket Ships, that’s progressivism for ya!

          • Wrabble

            Spam

          • frankstclair

            Are you saying white people are causing the lack of sunspots, or raving about some other nonsense?

          • Betterthanu

            Don’t cry snowflake. Just go to your safe space

          • frankstclair

            So that answers my question. You are raving.

          • David Boothby

            Amen Brother frankstclair. Do detect a heavy wave of insanity coming from many angles in the USA today ?

          • frankstclair

            Aye. And people have their own insanity hobby horse that gets injected into every conversation.

          • David Boothby

            I agree my friend

          • john martin

            They only want your wealth, they have no desire to even be around you, just as a mugger only wants your wallet or purse.

          • MissV

            sound like the government.

          • Clean Willie

            It is funny how the people of color have run wicked imperialist white people out of their countries but now feel entitled to unfettered access to the countries of those white people.

        • Tad Gnarley
          • peedee

            Let’s speak the truth, shall we? David Patraeus, resigned into early Mil.Gov retirement on $250,000 a year pension, free Tri-care, and free Space-A travel anywhere he wants to go shopping, fined $100,000 that was paid for by taxpayers, and got two years ‘probation’ with no parole officer, which he ignored as he’s already back on the shill circuit for the NeoLiberals. Nobody is following that story, unlike Snowden or Clinton.

          • 19238hmh

            Apparently you aren’t happy with the punishment the General received. But I think you missed the point of the comparison of the consequences for the General and Snowden vs clinton. Are you happy clinton has been punished not at all for her egregious criminal assault on our National Security?

          • slobotnavich

            The simple fact is that both generals Patraeus and McChrystal were sacked because they were suspected of having political ambitions – Republican political ambitions. Their “violations” pale into absurd insignificance when compared with Hillary’s handling of TOP SECRET documents, which are now most assuredly in the hands of the KGB/GRU and the Chinese intelligence services, both of which are now licking their chops at having Hillary the Hideous in the White House and under their full control.

            “Hey, Hill, this is Vlad. How ya doin’? Hill, we need the exact grid coordinates of all your anti-missile sites, and I mean right down to the last centimeter. That’s right, every one in all the NATO countries and all the US sites. We also need daily updates on the locations of all your missile subs. And Hill, the Chinese are buggin’ me about delivering the stuff to them as soon as I get it.

            What? Hey, Hill, I don’t give any s— about your upcoming congressional elections. That’s your problem – what the hell, you’ve got every 120 year-old black and Hispanic voting for you; you can handle it. Now I that need missile information, and I need it right now. Got it?

          • round them up

            And the moron wants our guns.

          • Wiley Coyote

            Actually, she’s smart for wanting to confiscate all our guns if she happens to get into office. The likelihood would be that fewer of them would be pointed in her general direction.

          • Philip Sieve

            She could do bullet control, though there would be major bullet buying.

          • Rosemariecterry4
          • William Ingram

            She can’t have my guns but she sure can have my bullets. At least the front end of said bullets.

          • Dindoo Nuffin

            They can have all of mine. Bring an oven mitt and a sack lunch. Barrel first and empty and red hot.

          • my2¢

            I believe your scenario has already happened which would make her a spy and an enemy of the state. That punishment doesn’t come with a fine.

          • slobotnavich

            But there is no punishment for Democrats – ever. They are the Chosen Vermin.

          • Dindoo Nuffin

            I would pay to see her roasted over an open fire but in reality she will be sentenced to a pedicure with a dull clipper by a heterosexual woman…and she will complain bitterly about it. Huma me on this.

          • john martin

            The pension you listed is complete BS, the highest ranking General or SES doesn’t come close to that amount.

          • MissV

            For his 38 years of service Petraeus receives a $220,000 annual pension.

          • john martin

            Wrong. “McHugh’s decision, approved by Defense Secretary Ash Carter, allows Petraeus to retain his full pension estimated at $208,000 per year, based on the military’s formula for calculating retirement pay. If the Army had docked him a star, his pension would have dropped to about $184,000 per year.” per USA Today article dated 2 March 2016.

          • It’s almost over

            Well, if it’s in the USA Today it as to be correct…! And rest assured the NY Times will back up the USA Todays figures!

          • gary schroeder

            NYT as backup ?
            Martin may never sing Soprano a g a i n
            the new york times is a fading URL tumbled out of sight – sound Thank-u-GOD

          • It’s almost over

            Yes Gary! Thank God these prapaganda newspapers are dying…!

          • round them up

            And they will fill his pockets other ways. They all need to hang.

          • gary schroeder

            b u t
            there are few uses for an untrustworthy general … retired … damn few

          • therealzircon

            And, the way things are going, Hillary is likely to walk away with no punishment, even though what she did was far more egregious than what Gen. Petraeus did. So, what’s your point?

          • greggreen29

            By a factor of at least a thousand!

          • therealzircon

            Yup!

          • pilgrimson

            Brace yourself, like it or not…The fix is in…Hillary Clinton… POTUS

            DONE DEAL!
            The country is too corrupted.
            It’s not how many vote, it’s who counts the votes!

            Hillary To Obama: If I Go Down, You Go Down – Judge Jeanine

          • Larry Dickman

            “Hillary To Obama: If I Go Down, You Go Down”

            On the same guy at the same time? Ewwwwww.

          • Rosemariecterry4
          • furd

            i wouldn’t want her to go down on my dog, she would give him some disease, not to mention freak him out as the ugliest bich ever to try to go down on him

          • Philip Sieve

            Well, the media is indirectly pushing for it with a woman preident in ID4 and the new Supergirl season. They did something similar before the gay marriage vote.

          • gary schroeder

            the smell of Democrats … lingers … like a family of skunks left on Highway #10 to dry to become nature itself
            time for the clintons to cash in THEIR chips 4 real gold

          • DontGruberMe

            Shall we, we shall:

            Petraeus misdemeanoris really minor compared to Clinton..He confined a secret to someone WITH THE SAME CLEARANCE AS HIM, whom he entirely trusted, and COULD trust.

            He also had a striling record of achievement.

            Hillary INSTRUCTS other people to shuffle around beyond top secret info on a Mickey Mouse server she set up in order to escape( illegally) scrutiny of her corrupt shennanigans.

            Hillary previous achievements is getting away with all her other crimes

          • MadBag

            Don’t know where you get the $250K pension. Fact is that the max he can be getting from his military retirement is 75% of the statutorily limited base pay of $15,125.10 a month a four star can make. This would be a maximum of $136,125.90 a year. And, Tri-Care is not free — inexpensive perhaps, but not free.

          • msmadness

            Actually, he retired at over 92% of base pay (new law allows 2.5%/year for time served up to 100% of base pay). Still, that equates to $169k/year, not $250K. Also, Snowden’s breach if FAR more serious than Petraeus. It’s one thing to give you mistress access to secrets (which, OBTW she had the clearance, just not the “need to know”) and dumping millions of pages into the public realm. And Clinton..we don’t know what was mishandled and may never. But TS/SCI photography doesn’t “accidentally” make it’s way from classified systems to a private, commercial server without human intervention.

          • MadBag

            Didn’t know about the change in the law. And, don’t disagree with anything else you say. Just wanted to point out that peedee is letting his/her fingers type faster than his/her knowledge should let them. Premise of the Tad Gnarly post is pretty much spot on. HRC will get away with everything even if she loses the election. Lots of time for an Obama pardon between 9 Nov 2016 and 20 Jan 2017.

          • msmadness

            Fix is in, plain and simple. I’ve never been a pessimist about America… Until now.

          • Mikeyoung6

            How does this affect the sunspot cycle?

          • greggreen29

            The pay change was appantly cause by the cycle.

            I thought the max retirement was 50%, but I served several solar cycles ago.

          • Bonanzadrver

            50% of base pay at 20 years. An additional 2.5% per year for each year served past 20 years to a maximum of 75% of base pay.

          • Rosemariecterry4
          • David Boothby

            You’re forgetting the under the table tax free money $$$$$$$$$$$$ that always comes their way after years of loyal service.

          • MadBag

            And what tax-free under the table money is that? Son of retired military, brother of two other retired military and none of them got tax-free under the table money. Tell me where it comes from so they can get their share.

          • Mikado Cat

            Patraeus heinous crime was sharing his personal calendar with his girl friend who also had very high security clearance. Clinton’s crimes are much much worse.

          • John Robinson

            Not to mention, she was the war correspondent that was with him in Iraq, and she was working on a book about the time spent there. That’s all this was – book research with an old war buddy.

          • AngryBlonde

            And he is a Bilderberg

          • R Michael Entinger

            Sorry, but Tri-Care is not free, nor is Space “A”. Shills like you spouting things you no nothing about because you never served makes you look stupid. His fine was NOT paid for by the taxpayer unless you consider EVERY dollar he made as a taxpayer dollar and that his service during that time was for naught. See, he served his country for 20+ years, EARNING every dollar he was paid.. EARNING!! By working 12+ hours a day, sometimes for weeks at a time like the rest of us do and did. And how do you know about his probation rules and whether he followed them? Did SOMEONE else tel you that to repeat like a good little shill???? How much of what you just spouted out was based on researched FACT and how much was just left wing bull-fertilizer hearsay?? What a baffoon you have turned out to be!

          • Bonanzadrver

            Unless the military has drastically upped their pay scales, I don’t think he ever made $250k/year. Maybe he did with housing benefits, combat pay and per diem for working overseas. At thirty years, a military member retires at 70% of their base pay which does not include housing, combat, per-diem or any other type of pay. My guess, without looking it up would put him around 100-150k/year. Feel free to enlighten me. I’m a retired military officer so I have some familiarity with the subject.

          • howard patters

            General Petraeus and Edward Snowden should not be running for President either…

          • carl6352

            well that’s hills gravy train the shill ckt! as for his so called crime he handed over just a few classified info about the war to his mistress hillary has over 2100 emails hooked to a unsecure server linked to her foundation! are you so dense or don’t care that she probably sold those secrets for donations or that most of those donations are coming from foreign entities especially china she met up with while running state! as for pratreus he earned his pension what has hillary earned?

          • andthentherewasthis

            and he doesn’t have to be president either. It only took what 5 years for the justice department to close his case file so he could apply for security clearance again.

          • Richard

            Go serve in the Army for 20 years and you will get Tri-Care too…its not all that great actually. And space A, lol…..its not worth it…if you have a week to get to Tulsa via Michigan, and stay up for three days, ..hey its great! You are an idiot. Oh, and no Govt worker ever got 250K….are you from Colorado? YOu must be smoking.

          • AppalachianHeathen

            As Louie Armstrong sang, “What a wonderful world……”

          • MissV

            And never forget what Gore Vidal always said about the USA. The USA of Amnesia. How long til the lights go out and China takes over? Keep up the illegal wars and it will happen sooner rather than later. An empire cannot stand.

          • AppalachianHeathen

            I think you’re misdirecting your rage. You’re preaching to the chior as far as I’m concerned, and making alot of assumptions that you’re the only one that cares!

          • DontGruberMe

            There is also Assange..

            In fact you cannot “steal” a document really, you can only copy it which means changing its viewership
            Which is what assange did really..he didnt steal any of the cables he just made them visible to the rest of the world..just like Hillary.

          • Tad Gnarley

            Ask Sandy Berger about stealing documents.

          • MissV

            Edward Snowden is a hero; and anyone that thinks less, is someone that is willing to give away every right we have as a human being, George W. Bush and Dick Cheney should be put into the photo. Then you would have a complete lineup (taking Snowden out of the picture) to stand before a firing squad for ALL their treason, lies, and terrorism. Obama should be charged as the biggest war criminal in history. He is starting to make daddy Bush look like a choir boy. I know most are either too young or has the standard USA of amnesia syndrome to remember when Daddy Bush ran Iran Contra our of the VP’s office while Reagan slept or stuffed himself on jellybeans.

          • Clean Willie

            The issue is handling of classified material. Why don’t you take your “I hate Bush” hobby horse somewhere where that is the topic rather than trying to hijack a thread where the majority of commenters don’t wear tinfoil hats?

          • gizkastomper

            The topic is climate change and you’re talking about Clinton…

          • MissV

            I guess a CIA official that is put out to the public by Dick Cheney and Robert Novak wasn’t considered REVEALING classified information? Why the hypocrisy? Talk about the tin foil. You need to remove it from your brain and remember past history instead of the BS you are fed by this POS government and media? Why don’t you ask Valerie Plame about classified information being given out by the Bush administration. Call a spade a spade. Mine is based on fact, what is yours based on? Flawed logic?

          • another_engineer

            “Break classification rules for the public’s benefit, and you could be exiled.
            Do it for personal benefit, and you could be President.”

            — Edward Snowden (@Snowden) June1 2016

          • Wiley Coyote

            This makes perfect sense to all the liberals out there who are capable of “cognitive dissonance” (the ability to maintain belief in two or more opposing ideas or concepts simultaneously within the same brain), which turns out to be all of them.

        • SafeSpaceSammy

          and she still tried to lie about that.

      • Stan

        Come on now!
        The FBI checked that dress, looked in all the pockets, and all they found was a wad of Bills.

        • pablosodahead

          Now that was very good.

        • AppalachianHeathen

          No, it was a Wad of Bill’s! Get it right damnit! That was such a very funny post!!! LMAO!

      • john martin

        But wait that wasn’t sex, it was an oral whatever.

        • 7962

          I’m sure my wife would look at it the same way……

      • oldbithead

        Hmmmm….I thought that was Communist News Network.

      • mike

        I always thought that was C No News

      • daf62757

        And she blamed it on the vast right wing conspiracy. So apparently Newt forced Bill to come on Monica’s dress then hid the dress for evidence later! Sounds like the right wing conspiracy alright!

        • RayGun

          I’m sure you tried to say something intelligent, it just didn’t come out that way. Perhaps if you rephrase this I could figure out what side you are taking or what your point is.

          • daf62757

            Maybe you aren’t old enough to remember this happening, or aren’t intelligent enough to comprehend sarcasm.

      • slobotnavich

        Haw!

      • mg4us

        RayGun. . .
        Good Point. . .but I think the article was “Sun Spots” not “Some Spots”. . .LMAO Hehe

        But then I recall the immortal words of Crooked Hil-LIAR-Y:
        What Difference does it make. . .
        Cosmic Rays from Sun Spots or Comic Spray for Some Spots

        As for Obama, He blames the lack of spots as George Bush’s fault.

      • Wiley Coyote

        I thought it was the Communist News Newwork.

        • Kapricorn4

          Hosted by Wolf Blitzkrieg the Israeli shill.

      • William Ingram

        Booo !
        Good point though……!

    • jim

      She wiped the sun clean of them clean just like her hard drives.

      • Mel_Anosis

        with a rag?

      • JBD

        With a cloth!

      • Stan

        She probably just looked up at the sun.

    • John

      Wait, this must be caused by man made global warming.

      • Buford Pusser

        Quick! We have to start a Sun-Spot Tax so we can blow holes in the Sun by sending Atomic bombs to it’s surface!

        • I’m Available

          Yes, if “Sol” refuses to pay a fine for its disorderly conduct, it must be punished.

        • David Boothby

          very wise indeed

      • Jay

        Man made? Yep, Trump did it. If the libs ever hear about this they’ll be rioting in the streets calling for Trump’s death.

        • Rudolph Von Galen

          Trump did it testing his own personal nuke arsenal.

          • Thomas Grand

            because he is a Nazi, of course.

          • David Boothby

            Ironic that a Nazi would support Israel 100% but it’s probably all part of some elaborate con game, then again with Trump you never know…

          • gizkastomper

            Well he does want to dismantle large swaths of the Constitution…

      • Mr. L

        Yep, Exxon and Georege Bush are to blame and the only way to counteract this is to transfer billions of dollars to Al Gore and his friends.

        • David Boothby

          I’m sure Brother Al would agree as he has made a fortune saying quite loudly that the world is ” Burning with a FEEEEEEEEEEEver !!

    • Chris

      Why do you ignorant right-wingers always have to bring politics into every discussion? This story has absolutely nothing to do with American politics so unless you actually have something intelligent to say, which I highly doubt, buzz off!

      • cdw

        Obama is a criminal.

        • Chris

          And that has to do with sunspots…how?!? Dumbass!

          • WTF?

            From Barack Hussein Obama on the topic of sunspots:

            “I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction”
            -Barack Hussein Obama, in his book, The Audacity of Hope, 2006

            “Barack Obama was steeped in Islam. He knew a lot about Islam from his childhood. But he knew very little about Christianity.” — Rev. Jeremiah Wright to author Ed Klein, 2012

            “The sweetest sound I know is the Muslim call to prayer”
            – Barack Hussein Obama, Cairo speech, 2008

            “ISIL is not Islamic.”
            – Barack Hussein Obama, speech September, 2014

            “The future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet Of Islam”
            – Barack Hussein Obama, United Nations speech, 2012

            “We do not consider ourselves a Christian nation.”
            – Barack Hussein Obama, speech in Turkey, 2009

            “The number of Muslims in the U.S. would make America one of the largest Muslim countries in the world,”
            – Barack Hussein Obama, JERUSALEM – 06/03/2009

            “Whatever we once were, we are no longer a Christian nation”
            – Barack Hussein Obama, June 28, 2006

            “We don’t have a strategy (to fight ISIL)…”
            -Barack Hussein Obama, remarks to reporters, July 2014

            “We have to educate ourselves more effectively on Islam”
            -Barack Hussein Obama, French TV

            20 Quotes By Barack Obama About Islam and Mohammed

            #1 “The future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam”

            #2 “The sweetest sound I know is the Muslim call to prayer”

            #3 “We will convey our deep appreciation for the Islamic faith, which has done so much over the centuries to shape the world including in my own country.”

            #4 “As a student of history, I also know civilization’s debt to Islam.”

            #5 “Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance.”

            #6 “Islam has always been part of America”

            #7 “we will encourage more Americans to study in Muslim communities”

            #8 “These rituals remind us of the principles that we hold in common, and Islam’s role in advancing justice, progress, tolerance, and the dignity of all human beings.”

            #9 “America and Islam are not exclusive and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap, and share common principles of justice and progress, tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.”

            #10 “I made clear that America is not and never will be at war with Islam.”

            #11 “Islam is not part of the problem in combating violent extremism – it is an important part of promoting peace.”

            #12 “So I have known Islam on three continents before coming to the region where it was first revealed”

            #13 “In ancient times and in our times, Muslim communities have been at the forefront of innovation and education.”

            #14 “Throughout history, Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial equality.”

            #15 “Ramadan is a celebration of a faith known for great diversity and racial equality”

            #16 “The Holy Koran tells us, ‘O mankind! We have created you male and a female; and we have made you into nations and tribes so that you may know one another.’”

            #17 “I look forward to hosting an Iftar dinner celebrating Ramadan here at the White House later this week, and wish you a blessed month.”

            #18 “We’ve seen those results in generations of Muslim immigrants, farmers and factory workers, helping to lay the railroads and build our cities, the Muslim innovators who helped build some of our highest skyscrapers and who helped unlock the secrets of our universe.”

            #19 “That experience guides my conviction that partnership between America and Islam must be based on what Islam is, not what it isn’t. And I consider it part of my responsibility as president of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear.”

            #20 “I also know that Islam has always been a part of America’s story.”

          • folma7

            SLAM!! I love comprehensive reviews of the Clueless In Chief…..regardless of the topic at hand. It’s odd the libbies that never tired of dragging either Bush (I or II) or Reagan into any conversation are now suddenly upset.

          • annademo

            As I said, they can dish it out but they can’t take it.

          • Rock9400

            I had no idea how brazen Obama’s support for Islam has been. I remember some of these quotes, but seeing them all together is rather telling of where his allegiance lies. I don’t think America is part of that allegiance. I hope Trump can sweep in and end the foolishness that has taken over our country. We have forgotten who we are. I believe Trump can fix the sunspots too! (tie-in to article)

          • AppalachianHeathen

            Dear god, I pray you are correct, Amen!

          • AppalachianHeathen

            Now I dare you to believe, he’s not the Imposter in Chief!

          • David Boothby

            Obama is right everyone. Quit trying to put down a man of genius. Our founding Fathers all bowed to Mecca 5 times a day 5 TIMES A DAY .Yes cut out of our history books by right wing goose stepping Neanderthal crazies.

          • Jay McGee

            Most of my physical science professors, full, associate, adjunct, are politically liberal/ progressive. So the safe presumption is that what we find here is a witches coven of redneck Republicans with more nyah- nyah attitude than space science knowledgability.

          • nikondvr

            Your comment just goes to show that you can’t make someone intelligent just because you give them a piece of paper.

          • pablosodahead

            Why let formal education get in the way of learning ?

          • Violet Warren
          • Veritas

            You say this until they try to levy a sun-spot tax on your Solar Panels. Not in my backyard you will say…

          • Infoczar

            Actually, the vast majority of our math and science profs are center right because they lean toward verifiable data over emotion. But you couldn’t get in here anyway.

          • Jay McGee

            Your boast of emotionless center- right cyborgs in numerous positions of academic authority is an unsuportable assertion. The turgid rigidity of politically conservative thinking has blighted many lives, but seldom actually accompanies innovative scientific thought and accomplishment. Of course an admission that this is generally accurate by politically reactionary trolls of the sort on display here is not expected . Would you like to extol the mindless presidential actions of G.W.Bush? I would enjoy further comic relief from the bunkers of conservative trolldom.

          • Abroche Su Cinturon

            Jay, its time to change your pad, you are getting grumpy and on the same cycle as Chris. Aiyiyiyi.

          • Jay McGee

            No more feeding of juvenile trolls, I’m done.

          • Jim

            No Jay please tell us more of your liberal education. Tell us how your professors extolled the virtues of Che and how buying toilet paper in Venezuela is a grand experiment in humanism. Maybe it is because of rightwing control that the oil rich South American country that had nothing but a bright future with a well educated and a peaceful and healthy population was destroyed by liberal ideology.

          • AppalachianHeathen

            Bitch slap!

          • Abroche Su Cinturon

            Wow, yoo are having a little self-pity-party….’better go full-tampon instead of the pad, El Jay-bo.

          • Abroche Su Cinturon

            oh wow, Aunt Flo, ‘really go you down theese month…”better switch to tampons, because the pads aren’t working, El Jay-bro.

          • Abroche Su Cinturon

            It’s ok, go change your pad, we’ll wait.

          • Caleb Adcock

            Says the person that has every aspect of human innovation harnessed and regulated by the leftist elite. The time you spent perfectly wording that post could have been spent learning about how you are being controlled.

          • Infoczar

            Are you crying Jay? Do you need a safe space?

          • Abroche Su Cinturon

            Go puff a fat chalupa, senor.

          • R. A.

            Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.

          • Daniel Matuska

            Professors are not necessarily doers or accomplishers.

          • AppalachianHeathen

            Never mind cdw Chrisy, you go and fly your little rocket ship off the the sun! Maybe there’ll be a few spots left for you before you get there. Be sure to pack a lunch, its a one way trip! Bye bye! Get a life and half a brain!

      • LouGots

        Oh, no. The common-ists have been beating the “anthropogenic global warming” drum as a foil for a government takeover of energy production and distribution. They are the ones politicizimg the discussion.

        • Chris

          And once again, that opinion may or may not be true but in any case it has NOTHING to do with this article. I might as well comment on the danger of high fructose corn syrup. Stick to the topic and stay out of the weeds or go to Fox news to post your stupid comments.

          • WTF?

            Time to change your pad Chris, you’re getting grumpy.

          • folma7

            Lol

          • Abroche Su Cinturon

            Bwahahaha, ding ding ding we have a winner! Awesome, senor!

          • AppalachianHeathen

            I knew it was smarty skirt, not that there’s anything wrong with that, not!

          • SDN

            Leftists like you just love to politicize science when it seems to go your way. What goes around comes around, so sod off, swampy.

          • annademo

            They can dish it out but they can’t take it.

          • nikondvr

            Just like a leftist. All for freedom of speech, as long as it’s yours. Eff you lefty. You don’t get to decide what others talk about so just eff off, eh.

          • Russ Ramey

            my my Chris is a bit slow in our book, of course this effects the discussion on man made climate change, that is the point. Facts once again are pesky things…

          • hmastercylinder

            Perhaps if he could see the link between the two, he wouldn’t be a totalitarian commie?

          • AppalachianHeathen

            Nah, not likely!

          • JMWinPR

            Would that make him a “fellow traveler” or just another “useful idiot”?

          • AppalachianHeathen

            Exactly. They’re beginning to get burned more and more each time they try to beat down our brush fires!

          • KarlJay

            Why don’t you just buzz off…

          • hmastercylinder

            Typical commie totalitarian.
            “I may not be right but…..SHUT THE EFF UP!!!!!!!!!!!!”
            Y’know, Mussolini, not Hitler……

          • Sunspot

            We rule the airwaves now. It’s not three TV stations to decide what will and won’t be said any more, dude. Welcome to the future!

          • Abroche Su Cinturon

            Somewhere in the Black Forest, a tiny handcarved clock is missing it’s little bird named Chris….cuckoo. Cuckoo!

          • AppalachianHeathen

            I love that scenario!

          • AppalachianHeathen

            You go to Faux News, if you think it’s so great smarty pants, oops, sorry, I mean smarty skirt, which is it anyway? Oh, whichever!

      • Thomas Comerford

        Since liberals have politicized the climate to no end, when news comes out casting further doubt on AGW, liberals are going to hear about it.

        • AppalachianHeathen

          You’re damned right, I mean correct!

      • mrunpc

        And so YOUR “intelligent” contribution to the discussion was…?
        Yeah, just as I thought.

      • Dayallaxeded

        What is the significance of reduced sunspot activity on conditions here on Earth? How does that affect human circumstances? Is there a relationship between human circumstances, particularly with respect to the effects of reduced sunspot activity and politics? Educate yourself, Chris, before you call others ignorant.

        • David Sparkman

          The sun is covered with elemental silicon, a good conductor of electricity. A sun spot is a hole in the surface that blasts energy and of course electricity into space. Science as usual doesn’t know the cause of the sunspots though they can generalize. The problem for the Global Warming Freaks is that an empty Sun, as this article calls it, is radiating less heat which in theory would cause the earth to cool. Fortunately there is an offsetting mechanism called GCR or Galactic Cosmic Radiation. This radiation increases as the sun weakens as spoken of in this article. The GCR increases the cloud cover on the dark side of the earth helping the earth retain heat. (Cosmic Rays can cause saturated air to form tiny water droplets as in a cloud chamber). Even the UN feels that GCR may be one of the main factors in the fluctuation of the Earth’s temperature. BTW ice ages seem to depend on our position in the galactic spiral arm, and not on CO2 content.

          • Atilla Thehun

            And CO2 lags warming rather than leading it. It’s an effect, not a cause.

          • Zthomm

            GCRs cause clouds, clouds cause cooling.

        • Perry

          Global warming is more correlated with sunspots than with CO2.

          • Dayallaxeded

            Agreed, Perry and something Chris, above, clearly doesn’t understand–I was trying to help him/her make these basic logical connections.

          • Perry

            We come to the truth in our own way. Some of us are dragged kicking and screaming. 🙂

            Since the original argument for CO2 and global warming was based on statistics, the sunspot explanation is particularly delightful. The solar physicists explain it fairly well in the article – less solar flux -> more gamma/cosmic radiation -> more high level cloud nuclei -> higher albedo -> cooler temperatures.

      • Jay

        Wouldn’t you say liberals wanting to pass laws to lock people up in jail for disagreeing with man made global warming that isn’t politics? When some sick bastard goes on a killing spree they don’t politicize it for every second they can???

      • Stan

        Buzzing causes global warming….

      • Veritas

        Since you don’t like the comments by right-wingers, what would a wrong-winger like yourself? What sort of comment would you like to leave on an article about sun-spot activity?
        Maybe “wow, gee whiz”
        Or “will this effect my tan”
        How about “what can we blame this on that isn’t true, but we could lie anyway”
        I eagerly await your reply

      • concretetundra

        Because it was linked on the front page of Drudge. Drudge readers are a very peculiar bunch. They love to congregate in comment sections and reinforce their far right, conspiratorial, ill informed opinions. Each upvote causes them to pat themselves on the back and makes them think they are right. It’s a lot of fun to watch. They say that liberals are dragging the right wing kicking and screaming into the future. If you want to see the actual kicking and screaming, click on ANY Drudge story and scroll down.

        • Sunspot

          Trump 2016!

          Let’s Make America Great Again together, concretetundra!

        • Abroche Su Cinturon

          So why are you here, pendeho?

      • Abroche Su Cinturon

        Get stuffed, you fascist trumpet.

      • R. A.

        We do it to beat the Leftards to the punch. Every time we do(which is not very often), they start complaining that “right-wingers bring politics into every discussion”. It’s as predictable as clockwork.

      • OneMadAmericanMom

        Why are you left wingers so ignorant of the 1st amendment?

        Read the Bill of Rights once in a while………tool

      • JMWinPR

        Did you fail to see the part where it states lower sunspot activity results in cooling of the upper atmosphere? This is contrary to the settled seance of AGW?

      • Yars

        There are no ‘wingers’ here Chris, so you can drop the false indignation. Anything that has to do with climate (is the Sun’s activity not responsible in large degree, for Earth’s climate…?), is immediately co-opted by the AGW crowd and used as a weapon to bludgeon both the naive and the stated ‘enemy’ (‘climate deniers’…)

        No Chris, AGW has ~Everything~ to do with ‘Politics’ by virtue of the fact that the entire concept was Political at birth to begin with…

    • Fire Marshal Bill

      She deemed the sunspots of a personal nature and deleted them.

      • loldirtsheets

        you drudgetards are so obsessed over Hilary and Obama, yet you allow them to rule over your? why don’t you do something about it wwith your second amendment rights

        • Stan

          Another violent old hippy….

        • saggypants

          we will vote for trump our only way to see this through.

        • Sunspot

          We outnumber you. You’re super lucky that “drudgetards” are a peaceful people, but keep pushing until we’re not. We’ll go all Return of the Jedi on your Empire.

        • AppalachianHeathen

          Why don’t you go rot in hail! Oh, and Fock U and your 2nd amendment rights, libtard, duhhhh!

        • 19238hmh

          You seem to be another “drudgetard” to whom you so affectionately refer. Always happy to have one more sane person who recognizes the criminality and destructiveness of Hillary (it’s spelled with two “L”s) and Ohbongo.

    • Tom

      Ordinarily I would say the scientific facts would stand at face value and as the fascist left would say, the reason for climate change is settled. But, in this world today’s democrat leftist often believe facts contrary to their talking point, don’t matter.

      • AppalachianHeathen

        You do mean ‘democratic leftists’ right?

        • Tom

          The identifier is Democrat. And yes most are fascist. Or at the very least, their leaders are.

        • R. A.

          Nah. They’re fascists, through and through.

    • Frankie D

      The Grifters have only 208 days left in the White House….then they gotta start paying their own freight…and I doubt that moocher-in-law will be shackin’ with them in Hawaii.

    • guido

      this is on the sun so it was not caused by humanity. your lame politics mean nothing to the sun.

    • Akira88

      Obama’s global warming will force them to tax solar energy.
      Look at how some states are doing a pilot on taxing mileage to keep the roads fixed.

      This stuff is worse than the tax on tea.

      • hmastercylinder

        FAR worse!

    • JuliaBolen

      lol

    • Stan

      Quite likely.
      She would steal Jesus off the cross.

    • shank_black

      Good one.

    • Attilathehun

      Please understand that AGW is not a scientific fact but instead is a political ruse intended to control your life. Think alcohol in gas, shutting coal so as to force building of solar and wind energy production. Establishment politicians and the rich donor class that finance them is making billions on your back.You are now being asked to give your money from “victim” countries that will suffer from AGW. This is a massive con game.

    • TheCircleisnowComplete

      Wow, very clever response there, how you linked the science article about sun stuff to Obama and Hilary. Amazing.

    • clayusmcret

      Oh, they’ll somehow link this to being caused by man made global warming.

    • C. D. Carney

      She was jealous that they outshone her so she decided to have them eliminated. Funny how a guy could shoot himself twice in the head…

    • islanchief

      Wow! DAIC

    • TAG

      I live in East Tennessee and there is a LOT of coal moving on rails. Both east and west on the Norfolk Southern line.

    • SmartCindy

      Yeah, but unlike the other two, Hillary is SUPER-HOT!
      Can’t wait to gaze into those sexy eyes for the next four years…
      Viva la Stupid American voters!

    • William Ingram

      Spotless does not (necessarily) mean lower heat radiation. I have found nothing that says the UV or IR has decreased, or increased. It just says that it is less active (or) less variant.
      In the past I have read that solar flares (especially larger flares) cause more damage to our skin and to our atmosphere – therefor – I can only “GUESS” that no flares and fluctuation means less negative reaction to us here on earth. – – – Maybe?

    • William Ingram

      She would if she could.
      So far the dimwit has lived up to her deserved reputation.

    • alkenethiol

      I just… what…? Why do you Drudge-Drones have to make everything political. In the name of all that is holy and not, this is an article about sunspots. You people are completely obsessed.

    • gizkastomper

      Meanwhile 2016 is set to be the hottest year on record…

    • gary schroeder

      weees got 300 years of coal
      -that is in ONE wonderful mine … goodbye Hillary … we’ll miss the Mau jakets

  • EasTexan

    Pretty hard to predict a variable star.

    • The Bacon Stops Here

      Especially when state-funded “scientists” are ordered not to even try.

  • News Reporter

    Daily Caller 2016/06/23
    Nearly two decades and $108 million worth of “disturbing” data manipulation with “serious and far ranging” effects forced a federal lab to close, a congressman revealed Thursday.

    The inorganic section of the U.S. Geological Survey’s (USGS) Energy Geochemistry Laboratory in Lakewood, Colo. manipulated data on a variety of topics – including many related to the environment – from 1996 to 2014. The manipulation was caught in 2008, but continued another six years.

    • seenbetterdaze

      They heard about the Clinton’s SLUSH FUND! They wanted their own Slush Fund…betcha the whole Congress has their own “charity”. Like that person head of the Food Stamps in her city, made a killing for herself with them. If you don’t have a Gruberment Job…you can get in serious trouble for starting your own Slush Funds.

  • Agent Smith Jr.

    Perhaps Obama can sign an Executive Order forbidding this type of Sun behavior.

    • Ferd Berfel

      beer summit!!

    • SWDC

      Rescind the Executive Order sealing his records and vet their POTUS finally

    • WTF?

      Hillary just asked, What difference, at this point, does it make?

    • David Sparkman

      Obama has already saved the planet. Global Warming stopped even before he assumed office. We might even be able to blame it on George W. Bush 🙂

  • Alan

    No need to worry. Saint bary obama will save the world ! After all, he walked all the way from Hawaii to the mainland to bless us with his presence.

  • 98 degrees here just outside Atlanta. I think its working well.

  • zither

    let me guess, obongo claims he can fix this by further flooding the us with illegals& terrorist muzzies then blaming Americans for’ driving suvs.

  • George Cargill

    Whether the weather be hot,
    Or whether the weather be not,
    We weather the weather,
    Whatever the weather,
    Whether we like it or not.

    • Fred Barnes

      “As a rule, man’s a fool. When it’s hot, he wants it cool. When it’s cool, he wants it hot. Always wanting what is not.”

      • Bevo2

        Either way we must raise taxes immediately.

        • The Lone Ranger

          Yes, that will fix it.

    • carloada

      I think that is the first clean limerick I have ever witnessed…

  • jokap12

    global warming…….just ask algore

  • NewNewEnglandPatriot

    Hilarious no info rwnjs think this story has anything to do with our climate change. Jesus you people justparrot whatever the F foxnoose breitbart and drudge tell you. Its pretty sad how easily you people are controlled.

    • George Cargill

      The hypothesis of man made co2 climate change has never and will never be subjected to the scientific method. It depends on money hungry “scientists” to call it a theory, corrupt politicians to call it a policy, gullible cool-aide drinkers to believe it, and the citizens to pay for it.

    • MoFreeMoney

      It’s all a big government power grab using the faux link between CO² and temperature. Then the regulating of CO² emissions.

      IF you look at ALL the data, not just a tiny piece you see that there is ZERO correlation:

      http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/06/04/dr-vincent-gray-on-historical-carbon-dioxide-levels/

  • Atilla Thehun

    Hey warmers: It’s the orange ball in the sky. The one responsibility for both weather and climate. AGW remains a myth. You really have nothing to hang your empirical hat on. And if you say CO2, I’m going to remind you that the real studies show that CO2 actually lags warming rather than leading it. Translation: It’s an effect, not a cause. But you go ahead and listen to that so-called 97 percent (of whom, 95 percent have no training in the field).

  • Alleged Comment

    Some expert predicted years ago an ICE AGE was returning amidst all the lying liars at the peak of the phony global warming sh it.

    Especially one Al Gored who should be in jail for his DAMNING lies that destroyed a lot of business IMO. I read the ICE AGE report and it made sense to me and after that I always believed that is what is COMING.

    • seenbetterdaze

      Algore predicted the seas would rise 250 ft. in the next few years…then he went out and Bought an Oceanfront Mansion costing over $8 Million near Santa Barbara, Ca. Must not have been too worried. Plus Obama Stopped the Oceans RISING 250 ft. remember? Then He and Moo bought an Ocean Front Mansion In Hawaii right be for he got Re-elected. Theirs cost over $30 Million!

  • Climate change has finally reached the sun. When oh when will we ever learn?

    • DMark Ward

      Yeah. There ought to be a law. One law…and 20,000 pages of regulations.

      • Plus addendum’s and appendices plus a shelf of indexes to find all the stuff.

  • Mike Loftus

    Dont worry Obama will blame the GOP for this

  • seenbetterdaze

    Our Grubers in DC figured out that our Weather/Climate is connected to MONEY…TAXES…and Regulations. Now they are having a hard time “selling” their “scientific discoveries” to the American Citizen Tax Payers. They should have just listened to their ole Grannies, like we did. Granny always used to say…”Everybody always Complains about the Weather! But Nobody can do anything about it!”
    uh-oh…Can the Grubers send me to the Fema Camps for saying that?

  • They said it would happen, and apparently it did. Pollution from fossil fuels finally reached the sun, diluted the amount of available oxygen in the solarsphere, reducing its ability to produce fire. This is the same exact thing that produced the last ice age. Mark my words, if the general weather patterns turn markedly cooler in the next 4-5 months, we have only ourselves to blame 🙂

  • Joe

    Lemme guess, climate is impacted somehow too?

  • WJ_texas

    What happened to the Super sized Gargantuan Monster El Nino of all time?

  • LtJoeBookman

    As an amateur radio operator for over 45 years, many of us have studied and understand solar activity because our overseas communications depend on the sun and its activity.

    There is something called a Maunder Minimum. It has, in the past, brought on mini ice ages.

    Also, these idiots that a predicting numerous power grid outages due to massive solar flares are full of it. (No late night radio talk show hosts need to be mentioned….) We have not had any flares in months! Yes, we have had disruptions due to solar winds. But the flares themselves have died away. So the scare tactic/clickbait in this article isn’t valid.

    • R. A.

      Actually we’re due for a real ice age, not just a Maunder Minimum type. The present interglacial period is the longest by far in the past ten million years or so.

  • Attila

    Golly, could the sun just possibly have a greater impact on global climate than humanity? Don’t expect any rational thought from AGW luddites.

  • radarnj

    So … all said our star has a profound effect on the weather of all the planets in our solar system. Is that why we call it our “solar system?” Question for you all…. Of Topic … The jet exhaust trails over the last 15 years have visually changed. They persist (do not evaporate) and during the day the sky fills with their expanded “clouds”. We can have a weather forecast of clear skys and by afternoon the sky is anything but clear. Why is it never mentioned the effect on climate this must be making all over the world??

    • The Bacon Stops Here

      It probably does have some (albeit, small, in comparison to the sun) effect on the environment. Which is a bit ironic considering all the elites of the world flying in their private jets to climate change seminars and lecturing us to give up our own luxuries.

      • nostudme1

        And guns, lest they shoot us dead!

      • carloada

        funny, they don’t see it that way…

    • LtJoeBookman

      I, along with others who are experts in solar activity, believe the sun is going nova. The whole “global warming”/climate change fiasco is a cover-up for a dying sun. With the sun going nova, more harmful ultra-violets are going to bombard the Earth. Someone has suggested that the “artificial clouds” created by the jets are to “reflect” ultra-violets away from our surface.

      • seenbetterdaze

        Chem-Trails?

        • LtJoeBookman

          Call them what you will. I really don’t believe they are carrying harmful chemicals, but reflector particles to ward off harmful ultra-violets. Question: Have you ever seen so many cases of skin cancer in your lifetime???

          • nostudme1

            SPF – 30?

      • JBD

        If the sun is going nova, it will expand and gobble up the earth before it explodes. There would be nothing we could do to prevent or mitigate that outcome. Jet emissions, in that context, would be irrelevant.

      • nostudme1

        Govt funded, I presume – – –

      • carloada

        I ate a Super Star from Carl’s Junior…it was good until it went Super Nova…

  • Lew

    It’s obvious this is caused by Earth’s climate change.

  • BPatMann

    Of course, it’s all due to carbon emissions in America.

    • DMark Ward

      And a bunch of SUVs. The big luxury ones. Consuming the Sun’s energy…on the Sun’s surface! There also needs to be a ban on corporate Jets. Except for Hillary. She needs to give a speech there. A last one.

      • JMWinPR

        Since when do brooms emit CO2? only methane, but it’s not from the broom

  • George Cargill

    NewEnglandPatriot,
    The hypothesis of man made co2 climate change has never and will never be subjected to the scientific method. It depends on money hungry “scientists” to call it a theory, corrupt politicians to call it a policy, gullible cool-aide drinkers to believe it, and the citizens to pay for it.

  • artvet2

    Wait – they forgot to mention that this low activity is a result of global warming, err, or is it making global warming worse, err, or is it what caused Brexit to succeed?

  • Conans River

    You guys getting this yet? The Sun is on some kind of WTF? activity loop. Whereas before the Earth could get by on large Green house emissions, now we can’t. We need to in all haste change what we are doing in order to mitigate what the Sun might do and is doing to global temperatures. This temperature spike is happening in our solar system.

    • The Bacon Stops Here

      Short of terraforming you’re not going to be able to counteract the effect solar activity has on our climate. Good luck with that.

      • Conans River

        Agree, Global warming, climate change is being sold to the peons as a problem we have control on, but must act soon. The reality is this is the Sun, and what was once a logical reason to reduce Green House gasses etc is turning into something else. A dire emergency to reduce anything in our atmosphere that will magnify the problems that our Sun may send our way.

  • WalterHorsting

    Sun cycles 24-26 bring a new grand minimum…it will be getting colder for the next 20-30 years. Less sunspots more cosmic rays and clouds that cools off the planet.

  • Doc T

    The Sun is just being racist.

  • Doc T

    Maunder Minimum, here we come.

    Livingston and Penn were right.

    • The Bacon Stops Here

      Precisely. The principle of “Occam’s razor” at play.

  • Born_n_Tejas

    The demonrats could figure out how to tax us for solar radiation, they would.

    • The Bacon Stops Here

      Or water vapor.

    • Whyfor

      Or they’ll say we have to reduce the population so that there will be more rays of sun per ‘elite’.

      • JBD

        Ok. They need to take some for the team. Start with reducing the population of elites.

        • Whyfor

          Yes…send them back to their hot bowls of primordial soup.

  • seenbetterdaze

    Every single day now…We are learning how big a RACKET Gruberment IS. Must be nice. The Tax Payers are fewer and fewer today, and getting soaked with all the Multi Millions of Illegals Obama brings into our country, who hop on his O-Gravy Train. Nearly a Third of our Citizens 95 Million people, are permanently OUT of WORK…QUIT Looking…and never counted among the “Unemployment Numbers!” So the Gov. numbers are made up, kinda like AGW.

  • tmalthus2010

    No effects on global whastever though. The Warmer Cabal treats solar input as a constant. The sun could go out tomorrow and models would still predict warming and the cabalists would want you to send them all your money.

    • nostudme1

      EU will be in need of massive funding

      • carloada

        whether the sun rises tomorrow or not, the EU will be in need of massive funding…

    • carloada

      calamity grifters all…

  • Juanita Broaddrick’s Upper Lip

    Sun?

    What sun?

    The pendulum has merely swung and now it’s time to corner the carbon DEBIT market due to anthropogenic global cooling.

    • Ferd Berfel

      LOL

    • JBD

      Come to Phoenix. I’ll show you Sun and heat. Grand Minimum sounds like a great idea.

  • Notice that the author completely ignores the fact that cosmic rays stimulate cloud formation by ionizing particles making them more attractive to water vapor. More rays equals more clouds equals cooler Earth.

    • Ferd Berfel

      all part of the ‘quiet sun – cooler Earth’ totality, we could see a Maunder Minimum and severe cooling right as far as another Little Ice Age… or not

  • Ferd Berfel

    now look what global warming has done!

  • normsrevenge

    So that’s why some of my tomaties are slow in blossoming.. it wasnt the chemtrails killing the pollinators after all. 8-

  • Solagratia

    Henny Penny and Chicken Little are a bit flummoxed.

  • Oh crap

    Only one thing to do drill baby drill…

  • PainesGHOST

    And we are beginning to enter the minimum phase of a 206 year supercycle that will DROP temperatures worldwide, with the minimum temperatures in about 2030. Search GRAND MINIMUM and get the scary truth about what is going to happen to our climate.

  • tmanosaurus

    What does ol Al, Ol hillarries “Shame an snuff America partner” have to say about this ………and the other climate scare mongers? Should we burn more coal to heat the world back up to a perfect 98.6?

  • Jodie

    Oh no, the sun’s going out! Now they will try to tax us for global warming and cooling at the same time.

    • nostudme1

      Liberal nirvana!

    • carloada

      sun comes up…tax ’em…sun goes down…tax ’em again…

  • Neil J. Rosen

    Obama will blame this on “Global Warming.”

  • The sun operates on a 360 year cycle with three phases: regulation oscillations, followed by a Grand Solar Maximum, followed by a Grand Solar Minimum. The last time there was a Grand Minimum was the Little Ice Age. The present phase began in 2009 with a new Grand Minimum now underway. Prepare for decades of colder winters reaching a bottom around 2040. Along the way there will be increasing fuel shortages, food scarcity, disease and loss of life. Enjoy the warmth while you can. No amount of pithy CO2 increase will change this inevitability.

    http://www.windpowerfraud.com
    http://www.aconvenientfabrication.com

    • Nah, that’s bull shit. The sun is 33 miles in diameter and spirals around the north pole at an altitude of no higher than a few hundred miles. In the Summer, it’s making smaller, slower loops, but will gradually expand and speed up until it reaches the furthest distance from the North Pole—the Winter solstice.

  • The sun is 33 miles in diameter and spirals around the north pole every 24 hours.

  • Bill Catz

    I’m sure Al Gore will need a solar tax to keep this from happening again in the future.

  • justmeanu

    C02 now over 400ppm and Global temperature going down. Earth to Houston, I think we have a problem.

    • Leftwithrightbrain

      Global temperature going down

      You’re either delusional or a liar. Pick one. The first five months of 2016 are the hottest in the temperature record by the widest differential ever recorded.

      • R. A.

        You must be looking at the infamous Tamperature Records.

        • Leftwithrightbrain

          You’re either delusional or a liar. Pick one.

  • Jerry_In_Detroit

    Obviously this is due to Anthropogenic Sunspot Depletion brought about by all the solar power installations that Obama’s cronies have been setting up to plunder taxpayers.

  • J.E.Walker

    Somehow, the loony left will try to capitalize on this. Perhaps a solar weakness tax?

  • blank

    We need a global tax rate of 90% before it’s too late!

  • jim

    No worries Obama, the messiah that he is will sign an executive order next week restoring sun spots.

  • Martin Van Nostran

    Dalton, meet Maunder. Maunder, Dalton. I’d like you both to take a look at these AGW ‘computer models’.

    • Leftwithrightbrain

      I’m certain you have never been near a building or institution where climate modelling is successfully executed. If you knew the tiniest bit of information you’d know that computer models refer to hardware such as Dell, HP, etc. Last time I checked the current excess energy in our climate system falls within the 95% confidence interval of the range predicted by current modelling simulations. Obviously you’ll not care, because you don’t understand the models.

      • R. A.

        I’m certain no one has ever been near a building or institution where climate modelling is successfully executed, because the climate has never been modelled successfully.

        • Leftwithrightbrain

          If your research was as thorough as you imply, you should be turning up different results. Have any help/links from a scientist or scientifically literate person who knows what they’re doing?

  • Giordano_Bruno

    . . . yet not a word about “climate” or “weather” in the whole article. A serious oversight for an article in Climate Depot.

  • tmanosaurus

    We are peaked now at the warm part of the warm cycle of the 100,000 year Ice age cycles, Its a time when the weather hovers and changes more dramatically in our comfort zone, nothing to worry about except that Canada, Russia and and everything else above the 49th parallel is under a couple of thousands of feet of ice in a mere fifty thousand years from now. These are the good times folks, this report from one of the nations top notch geologists. Read the book “On the Trail of the Ice Age floods” by Bruce Bjournstad. Its fascinating and makes for Great vacation planning! That’s the only way to round out what your imagination cannot stretch itself around. See it with your eyes. tour it from Missoula Montana following the Columbia river and its surrounding flats and canyons down into Oregons wine country in the willamete vally and onto the mighty Pacific. You will know and believe. All else is politics for the minions and idiots. I know thats a bit rough on some people but really, read the factual accounting of this planets ongoing records of climate change and please, turn GORE off when he gets on his global warming rants, they are abusesof reality for abuse of your pocketbooks. Its possible we will survive because of coal and coal alone. A slight possibility but still a real possibility.. Open your eyes, see the real thing, rocks dont lie! Follow the Columbia river from Missoula Montana to the Pacific Ocean for a great family journey.
    Courtesy of Great Flood Wines, inc, @ Great Flood Wines dot com, (currently in the shop for design changes).
    Winesdotcomm represented soon…… , floods, find the wines, learn the truth!

    • Leftwithrightbrain

      We are peaked now at the warm peak of the warm cycle of the approximately 100,000 year Ice age cycles

      Complete junk science and nonsense. First, we’re in an interglacial of the current ice-age. Second, the natural warming cycle peaked about 8 ka back and the Earth is in a natural axial nutation cooling orbital phase. d. Third, the planet is warming at unprecedented rates (30x natural) due to human induced CO₂ into the atmosphere. Fourth, we pay some very smart people to observe and research this phenomena.

      • R. A.

        “Smart” does not mean “correct”. AGW predictions show this very clearly.

        30x natural, compared to what?

        The present warming trend started over one hundred years before any significant human CO2 output. And as a “warming trend” it is a paltry one degree C per century. The planet has been much warmer than this many times in the past; warm periods are always more stable and more conducive to the proliferation of life and civilization.

        • Leftwithrightbrain

          They don’t say that they are correct but they do have the best explanation for the evidence. If they weren’t there’d be others publishing better unfalsifiable explanations and I’m sure there’ll be a few tweaks here and there but not the central theme. AGW predictions have all proven to be accurate … care to share which one/one that the theory predicted that didn’t materialize? What do you think 30x natural means … that is as clear as it can be to a scientist when discussing current extant and climate. It usually refers to the current ice-age. Your warming trend is pure vacuity and any glimpse at the ice core data will show you how inaccurate your statement is. The planet is in a natural cooling cycle so the current warming is unnatural. Your last sentence is a non sequitur and basically meaningless.

  • Chief Mac

    Somehow it’s either the fault of Trump or conservatives.

  • Snailmailtrucker

    Someone forgot to pay the electric bill !

  • maynardb50

    It would be a good time to send some astronauts to the sun.

  • pathbu

    if Britain can brexit we can UNxit no money for countries that hate us

    • Snailmailtrucker

      10000 ^^^^^^^^

  • Snailmailtrucker

    If the Sun is a Nuclear furnace like the Main Stream Scientific Community tries to tell us… why does it weigh 1000 X less that what would be necessary for it to function ?
    How can Sun spots that are on or near the surface of the Sun be Millions of degrees cooler that what can be measured a million miles away from the surface ?
    How can the surface be 5000 degrees and 10 million degrees many miles away from the surface ?

  • Snailmailtrucker

    Here’s one for you….
    A Shocker: Solar Wind Provokes Lightning on Earth | Space News

  • LibsAreWrong

    6 more months of the guy putting his thumb in our eye.

  • Down Lowbama

    That fifteen year pause in sunspots is notable.

  • Olisk

    This may come as a shock to the green nicks but .. the top of the planet is still frozen and its summer.

    http://www.natice.noaa.gov/pub/ims/ims_v3/ims_gif/ARCHIVE/NHem/2016/ims2016176.gif

    • Leftwithrightbrain

      True but it’s the lowest extent and volume in the record. So what’s your point?

      • Olisk

        Bull Cr ap

        • Leftwithrightbrain

          You can take a peek right now at the live results: http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/

          They clearly show you’re FOS with the Arctic extent being the lowest in the record and more than two standard deviations below 1981-2010 mean.

          • Olisk

            Pure fabrication

  • truthy

    You can tell from the idiotic comments this was linked to on Drudge

  • K. Chris C.

    Summary of “climate change” in a nutshell:

    “Show us the money! Show us the money! Shooooow us the money!”

    • feellikeastranger

      climate change ==

      “Let’s scare the living hell out of everyone and gain power, influence and money while pretending to do something about it! First we’ll start with catastrophic predictions in the short term, when those fail utterly we’ll push them back to the year 2100! All Hail Us! Savoirs of the Planet! “

    • Leftwithrightbrain

      You’re either a pernicious fool or a perfidious charlatan. Pick one.

  • High on trump

    This is very interesting. Look into the mounder* minimum (mounder is spelled wrong) It suggests that the lack of activity on the sun correlates with global cooling (only speculation) but this lack of activity will solve or at least shed light on the mounder minimum. If you have a reflector scope get a solar filter and you can see the spots for yourself, you walk away with an absolute feeling of something waaaay bigger than yourself

  • High on trump

    lol drudge links a science story and here comes the politics.

  • cjkcjk

    Science has become so dirtied and discredited because of the left that most intelligent people are readily going to point that fact out every time they get the chance.
    The new priesthood of a post modern world. Might as well be consulting the astrologers 5000 years ago in Mesopotamia.

  • PaulfromTexas

    Everyone needs to read or view John Casey’s work
    ” Dark Winter”
    and don’t give away your longdrawers

  • RayGun

    This will be known as the Landscheidt minimum. We are watching his prediction unfold before our eyes.

  • blackdog

    We’re very political, aren’t we? ice age a’comin! Bundle up!

  • cjkcjk

    I’m not 100% sure on the science here but we know that somehow evil white men have done some kind of sh!t to the Sun.
    I think they’re trying to take down Farrakhan’s Mothership.

  • william heller

    No where does this article speak to the planetary effects (earth is of interest to me) of these solar minimums. Longer winters? Cooler summers? Wetter? Drier? Crop effects? Poor reporting.

  • This is caused by global warming – Al Gore said so.

  • LawyersGunsorMoney

    This article will only energize the “deniers” and, therefore, the writer should be cast into Hell. Climate change is caused by human activities. The Sun isn’t even on our planet.

  • GrizzMann

    This is all because of Global Warming and the excessive use of windmills. The Windmills cool the sun and their vibrations cause earthquakes. When will you people listen??

  • carloada

    tell ya what…reading through the comments here makes me want to invite everybody over for a party…

  • MBlueraider

    And Obama blames it on global warming and the GOP

    • Leftwithrightbrain

      Puerile vacuity.

      • MBlueraider

        Monty Python

        • Leftwithrightbrain

          Perhaps. But Cleese and co. at least grasp climate science and speak rather eruditely on the topic. pays to go to good schools and universities even if they didn’t follow a science career.

          • MBlueraider

            Now for something entirely different; I would be happy to agree with them, but they are wrong.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Nope. 200 years of physics would need to be overturned if that were true.

          • MBlueraider

            Once again, wrong. Science has admitted to the false data. Signing off.

  • Outlaw Josie Wales

    “Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?

    The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying, Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us.

    He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision. Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure.

    Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion. I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.

    Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession. Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter’s vessel.

    Be wise now therefore, O ye kings: be instructed, ye judges of the earth. Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling.

    Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little.

    Blessed are all they that put their trust in him.” (Psalms 2:1-12)

  • John Locke

    Another “maunder minimum” coming along with global cooling. Perhaps this one will last more than 70 years. It is a good thing we heated things up otherwise this would be a catastrophe. Thank your industrial revolution kids.

  • Fubar

    More proof of global warming…lol

  • Grintsum

    This is bad news for the global warming crowd. If the Earth gets noticeably cooler over the next few years, then how can they keep screaming that mankind is overheating the planet? Of course, they can lie about it like they’ve been doing since the beginning of this AGW nonsense.

    • TMAC

      They will simply pull out and recycle all the ‘New Ice Age’ coming crap from the late 60’s.

      • Grintsum

        If they do that then they may get it right this time, but it won’t be due to anything that humanity is doing.

  • Jelly Bean

    Oh my gosh! We are all doomed. It is global warming! or Global cooling! or Climate change! Or whatever the daily panic catastrophe from the demoncRAT liars is. We are all finished if we don’t vote demoncRAT. right? LOL Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. Hey demoncRAT liars. We get it now. We will NEVER listen to you or the state press again. Get used to it. You better arm up too. Like we are. We are not afraid of you anymore. And We are not afraid to fight like you are.

  • steveo

    Blame the Republicans. Signed,,The Great Right Wing Conspiriicy

  • furd

    this couldn’t be correct? it goes against Obunghole and his minions narrative of global man made warming, you know the theory that caught weather scientists falsifying data, making up numbers, and changing climate figures going back 100 years to suit their fraudulent narrative

    • Leftwithrightbrain

      caught weather scientists falsifying data, making up numbers

      You’re either delusional or a liar. Pick one. I’m sure you’ll demonstrate that I’m incorrect and cite the peer-reviewed science that you gleaned those pearls of wisdom from, right?

      • furd
        • Leftwithrightbrain

          Only an uneducated m0r0n who is obviously neither a scientist nor scientifically literate would be fooled by the fossil fuel shill Tony Heller (realclimatescience) who has never researched nor published one article about climate science using its given name or its pseudonym Steven Goddard. Heller/Goddard has had to issue several written apologies to NASA, NSIDC and NOAA for his pseudo-climate science alleging they were wrong over the years to avoid libel suits as he didn’t have the evidence to support his denier claptrap. The classic was he published an article titled “Arctic ice refuses to melt as ordered” in The Register on 8/15/2008. Goddard claimed that the NSIDC plot of the extent of Arctic Sea Ice was wrong. However, on 8/25, Goddard retracted his claim, saying that “… it is clear that the NSIDC graph is correct, and that 2008 Arctic ice is barely 10% above last year – just as NSIDC had stated.” Anthony Watts May 17, 2016 at 10:10 am “Goddard has no presence here after he failed to admit to CO2 freezing out of air blunder a few years back.”

  • steveo

    they don’t want to admit the sun has effects on Earth’s weather. Just like Muslims don’t have an affect on Gay gun sales. Well everyone’s gun sales for that matter

  • pfwag

    Obviously caused by global warming.

  • rthomp8363

    Let me guess, this was caused by Global Warming cause by Humans.

  • Poseidon

    It doesn’t matter. Democrats think man-made CO2 creates heat.

    • Leftwithrightbrain

      Nope. They understand thermodynamics and how blocking or making the path for outgoing IR longer causes the surface of the Earth to warm as our planet stays in energy equilibrium with space.

      • R. A.

        No, they don’t understand that. Any legitimate thermodynamic study of climate would seek to understand the primary source first instead of wasting time looking at secondary effects.

        • Leftwithrightbrain

          You clearly don’t understand the Earth’s energy balance. I suggest you visit NASA or NOAA websites that have very good lay person explanations. Hint: The moon’s surface temperature doesn’t behave the same as the Earth yet for all intents and purposes both are the same distance from the sun.

          • R. A.

            The moon has the albedo of an ice cap, for one. It has month-long day and night cycles as well.

            But I’m sure what you’re”hinting” at is the moon’s lack of atmosphere, implying this is why Lunar surface temps differ from that of earth, ergo, climate scientists are totally legitimate in their study of earth’s atmosphere as it relates to climate.

            First, yes the study of earth’s atmosphere as it relates to climate is legitimate. My point is that, since it is by definition a secondary effect, all the data, knowledge, and understanding of it is worthless without an understanding and accounting of the Primary driver of climate, the Sun.

            Back to the moon. It has vast surface temp swings from day to night. This is partly because of the two-week long day, followed by two weeks of night. It is also because, as you hinted, there is no significant atmosphere.
            But a Lunar atmosphere would serve to regulate the vast temp changes, by acting as an insulator and causing dispersion. In other words, your “hint” demonstrates that atmospheric effects are dampeners, regulators, of extreme shifts that would be caused by the Primary. This is in direct opposition to the position of AGW proponents’ claims that atmospheric effects will be the cause of devastating shifts.

            tl;dr: wrong argument bro

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Clearly you have little grasp of AGW theory and the role of the atmosphere. Pretending atmospheric and climate scientists haven’t a grasp of the science is just crass ignorance on your part.

      • Poseidon

        What happened to runaway global warming?
        Global warming scientists said winter storms would be a thing of the past and kids won’t ever see snow again.
        What about all those predictions that arctic ice would already be all melted and permanently gone?
        What happened to the dozens of hurricanes they said would hit the US coastlines every season?
        What happened to all the predictions of accelerated rising sea levels?
        What happened to all the predictions of increased tornadoes, droughts, floods, disease, starvation, locusts….?

        Every prediction has been proven wrong.

        Is there anything that would invalidate their hypothesis?

        • Leftwithrightbrain

          Do you always segue off-topic when schooled or lose a point?

          You have a long list of red herrings and straw man fallacies – a great indicator that the writer is a bull$h!tter! An informed person with integrity would state when prediction was made, by whom, and provide the evidence that it failed. So far everything I have reviewed has been coming in worse than predicted. What did the first IPCC report predict … how well has it fared? If you know the Q and A then it will be self-evident to you that you’re FOS.

          • Poseidon

            You can’t respond. Just like all global warming believers. Gotcha! You can only make personal attacks. I’ve played this game with you people many times. I have quotes, sources and you’ll just change the subject, never admitting you’re wrong.

            Name something, anything that would invalidate the hypothesis.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            I responded fully … what are you struggling with?

          • Poseidon

            Responded with personal attacks, not refuting anything.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Cupcake those were not personal attacks. You segued off-topic and introduced the straw man and red herrings. Am I supposed to pretend that didn’t happen?

          • Poseidon

            It’s really sad so many people like you are so uninformed and brainwashed. They’ve been doing this since the early 1900s, switching between global cooling and global warming every 30-40, using the same language and scare tactics. The solutions are all the same: bigger govt, more taxes, less freedom. You should study history — of politics, not science.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Cupcake you are making up stories again. As to uninformed … it is evident that you have little science knowledge at middle school level. OMG, not this ancient trope again. It was Frank Luntz, the Republican pollster, who advocated calling it “climate change” because it seemed less threatening. And the climate has indeed been changing over time, but not over the last few thousands of years, and never near as fast. And while CO₂ may have been a following indicator in the past, it is the leading cause at this time, as has been understood by atmospheric physicists for decades. I’ll ignore your opinion about taxes as it is not germane to the science.

          • Poseidon

            In about 20 yrs, liberals will change back to global cooling and scare us with the coming Ice Age. It’s the sun, and solar cycles, not man-made CO2.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Science has no ideology. What bothers me more about the real morons who feed you this tripe is that we are launching ourselves into a new planet equilibrium that is unfriendly to our (human) and extant existence. We are in an ice-age. Current warming has nothing to do with sun or solar cycles … if that were true the planet would be in a long-term cooling trend thanks to the current axial nutation forcings and slightly cooling sun. You’re quite good at making up fairy tales. Unfortunately for you we know it’s the external forcing of human-induced CO₂ that’s causing teh unprecedented warming.

          • Poseidon

            We’re in an inter-glacial period. The sudden and temporary emergence from Ice Ages has nothing to do with CO2 or man-made CO2.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Nope … your science is awful. We are in an ice-age, period. We’re either in an interglacial or a glacial. Climate has been studied for two centuries. The full theory of anthropogenic global warming was first formed in 1896. In the past 800k years or so orbital forcing factors (mostly axial nutation) would create shifts in temperature which would be greatly amplified by CO₂ being sequestered (cooling) or released (warming). CO₂ was the feedback on top of nutation, so the both of them were the major forcing factor. Atmospheric CO₂ content is close to 0.041%, a miniscule swing of ±0.01% during the past 800k years with orbital forcing has taken the Earth in and out of glacial periods.

          • Poseidon

            We’re in an ice age? You can believe whatever you want to believe. It’s called summer.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            It is winter in the SH, so what’s your point? No belief required … you just need to to a little more reading and pay attention in science class when you get to HS.

          • Poseidon

            This is where you warmists ALWAYS bail:
            1) identify something, anything that invalidates their hypothesis (global cooling or no climate change?)
            2) what caused all the periods of cooling or lack or warming while CO2 was increasing? (you can’t because it invalidates the hypothesis that CO2 is the main driver of temps.)

            I have more, but know it’s a waste of time with you people.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Well glad to know you have more because so far you’re produced nothing but gibberish. I can’t answer (1) because you keep this hypothesis untitled so who knows what you’re rambling on about except you, perhaps? (2) makes no sense at all unless you don’t understand how seasons come and go and that we have two hemispheres, and that there is a dynamic weather system. Maybe your science is so poor you don’t know how to express yourself. The current warming is entirely driven by the external forcing of human-induced CO₂. I’m not sure you will be able to digest this but try Gillett et al (DOI: 10.1029/2011GL050226) who show the human attribution of the warming trend to be 102% of observed warming from 1851 to 2010 and 113% of the observed warming from 1951 to 2000 and 1961 to 2010 (averaged together) .Take a very close look at Figure 1 which in (a) shows all forcings, (b) natural forcing only (declining trend i.e. cooling), (c) GHGs only and (d) aerosols only (also declining i.e. cooling).

          • Poseidon

            The original hypothesis said rising CO2 will warm the polar regions.
            ———–
            Then they said CO2 is the main driver of global warming.
            Then they said CO2 is the main driver of climate change.
            Then they said CO2 is the main driver of weather.
            Then they said CO2 is the main driver of extreme weather.
            Now they say CO2 is the biggest, imminent threat to life on the planet.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            What hypothesis … you remain coy … is there a reason you can’t share the name?

          • Poseidon

            The original hypothesis said rising CO2 will warm the polar regions.
            Then they said CO2 is the main driver of global warming.
            Then they said CO2 is the main driver of climate change.
            Then they said CO2 is the main driver of weather.
            Then they said CO2 is the main driver of extreme weather.
            Now they say CO2 is the biggest, imminent threat to life on the planet.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            What hypothesis … you remain coy … is there a reason you can’t share the name?

          • Poseidon

            Your hypothesis.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            What hypothesis … you remain coy … is there a reason you can’t share the name?

          • Poseidon

            The original hypothesis said rising CO2 will warm the polar regions.

            How can you not know that? You just repeat what you’re told.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            What hypothesis … you remain coy … is there a reason you can’t share the name?

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            What hypothesis … you remain coy … is there a reason you can’t share the name? Scroll up and check for the name of the hypothesis I supposedly proposed/used. If you can’t find it, i know you won’t, then you’re just been playing charades … but I’m game.

          • Poseidon

            CO2 cause global warming? Can’t respond?

          • Poseidon

            You’re evading everything. You’re losing big time. What do you mean by denier?

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            What hypothesis … you remain coy … is there a reason you can’t share the name? Denier is a person who gainsays science.

          • Poseidon

            Your hypothesis, you know the one where CO2 causes global warming? Cat got your tongue? Not capable of independent thought?

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Making up stuff is not going to fly. What hypothesis … you remain coy … is there a reason you can’t share the name?

          • Poseidon

            CO2 causes global warming? Who’s the denier? You’re making warmists look really small.

          • Poseidon

            I’ve done this before and know you can’t answer. It’s why AGW scientists never want to answer direct questions.

            If it was true, scientists would present their case to world for scrutiny and everyone would believe it. When people hear opposing viewpoints, most people immediately disbelieve the nonsense. The data doesn’t exist.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            What hypothesis … you remain coy … is there a reason you can’t share the name? Spell out the hypothesis that I have stated. You can scroll through all our comments and then either point to what I have missed or acquiesce and move on as you’re unable to tell me or anyone else what hypothesis I’m supposed to be answering.

          • Poseidon

            CO2 causes global warming. Ever hear of it?

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Nope. Try again!

          • Poseidon

            Everybody reading these comments can see you’re afraid to answer. Are you a liberal college professor or student?

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Nope what comes across very clearly is you have an inability to express what you want to discuss. Puerile projection is so passé.

          • Poseidon

            But evidence that challenges the prevailing theory bores Kate Marvel, who brushes it off by declaring: “No serious scientist truly believes that the slowdown in surface warming invalidates greenhouse physics.”

            This is utterly superficial. The basic physics of the greenhouse effect are not the issue here. At issue is a whole series of more complex questions: whether the increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide is mostly attributable to human beings, whether that increase produces a large enough greenhouse effect to warm the planet, and whether any effect from carbon dioxide (which is actually a very weak greenhouse gas) might be offset by the enormous number of other factors in an extremely complex system. So to cite basic physics—a common trope of the warmists—is a glib and irrelevant answer.

            Marvel goes on to assert that the pause in warming can be explained by “a massive increase in ocean heat content.” Well, all right, I suppose this is a plausible theory. But it is also a very new one—and only one of 52 different theories offered to explain the hiatus.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Very weak deflection. Where ever you sourced that from you were duped. What hypothesis … you remain coy … is there a reason you can’t share the name?

          • Poseidon

            Your hypothesis. It sounds like you’re evading because you know you can’t respond.

          • Poseidon

            Do you even know you own hypothesis? I suppose it’s too easy to refute since you’re not answering.

          • Poseidon

            Most recent warming occurred in the first half of the 20th century followed by cooling for about 30 yrs (which triggered the switch to the coming Ice Age in the early 70s) and then some warming beginning in the mid 70s. Of course they changed the historical temps to erase the cooling.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            That comment is pure bull$h!t!

          • Poseidon

            You’re uninformed. Did you not know they changed the historical data to create the appearance of global warming?

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            It wasn’t just changed, it wasn’t done in secret, it is in the public domain with full methodology and reasons. If you think it was nefarious you’d better start assembling your research to rebut what was done. You probably haven’t seen the homogenization plotted against raw data … if you had you’d see that raw has a steeper warming trend. So what’s your point? Other than 1024 – to current showing that warming has probably been underestimated.

          • Poseidon

            The first time was all secret. When it was discovered, they first changed it back without explanation. They also recalibrated many of the surface thermometers in the early 2000s to create the appearance of global warming. Mann wiped out the Medieval warming period and the little ice age to create the appearance of global warming. Did you not know of such things?

            Still can’t answer any questions. What would invalidate your hypothesis? (Still too afraid to state one?) (ans. Hint. nothing. CO2 causes everything.)What caused all the historical periods of cooling or lack of warming while CO2 was rising? (hint, it’s not CO2!)

          • Poseidon

            The big difference between you and me is that you only know one side, your side. It’s like you never heard any opposing viewpoints or the science behind it. We skeptics know all sides. You’re gullible, lack curiosity and don’t really care about the truth. Everything you’ve said, we’ve heard it before.

            You still can’t answer those two:
            What would invalidate the hypothesis (even yours)?
            How to explain the periods (many decades) of cooling or lack or warming while CO2 was rising?

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            You are not a skeptic … you are a science denier. A skeptic understands the science whereas you’re clueless. BTW: true skeptics (scientists) have had 60 years or more to produce an alternate model and/or hypothesis to explain the unprecedented warming. Nothing has appeared in the peer-reviewed publications yet that was unfalsifiable. Your last question is not valid until you can show the data that has many decades of cooling. Your first one is still not clear … could you give the name of the hypothesis you want to discuss? Seems like you just ignored the excellent science paper I cited for you which would have answered your questions.

          • Poseidon

            I think you’re ignorant. I think you people placed all your eggs into one basket (CO2) and are now paying the price trying to hold on to a discredited hypothesis.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            You deflect again, why? Can’t find the decades of warming or what? Still can’t name the hypothesis you inconsistently but repetitively prattle on about. This is ignorance on steroids and I quote you:

            The sudden and temporary emergence from Ice Ages has nothing to do with CO2 or man-made CO2

          • Poseidon

            Do you believe in the hockey stick graph by Michael Mann?

          • Poseidon

            To repeat:

            “No serious scientist truly believes that the slowdown in surface warming invalidates greenhouse physics.”

            This is utterly superficial. The basic physics of the greenhouse effect are not the issue here. At issue is a whole series of more complex questions: whether the increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide is mostly attributable to human beings, whether that increase produces a large enough greenhouse effect to warm the planet, and whether any effect from carbon dioxide (which is actually a very weak greenhouse gas) might be offset by the enormous number of other factors in an extremely complex system. So to cite basic physics—a common trope of the warmists—is a glib and irrelevant answer.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            whether the increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide is mostly attributable to human beings, whether that increase produces a large enough greenhouse effect to warm the planet

            I already gave you the published peer-reviewed science that answered that posit … why are you repeating yourself and not reading the science?

          • Poseidon

            When you use the term ‘denier,’ what do you mean?

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            You deny or gainsay what is explained by science from ignorance as you have neither education or knowledge..

          • Poseidon

            That’s a child’s answer. Deny what science?

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            You own it, embrace it.

          • Poseidon

            Why won’t you answer?

            1. What would invalidate your hypothesis?
            2. What explains all the historical periods of cooling or lack or warming when CO2 was rising?
            ——-
            I’ve done this before with you people and know you people never answer. Never. You can’t, because it exposes all the flaws inn the hypothesis and your thinking.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            You got to tell me what hypothesis. I’ve been waiting patiently for you to name the hypothesis but for some strange reason you are unable to say whether it is the Milankovitch hypothesis or gravity according to string theory or Clausius-Clapeyron hypothesis etc.

          • Poseidon

            What would invalidate your global warming hypothesis? You know the one that says CO2 causes global warming?

            I’ve done this before and know you’re unable and unwilling to answer and eventually you’ll just go away before you make a larger fool of yourself.

          • Poseidon

            Still waiting. If CO2 causes global warming, but global temps fall or don’t rise with more CO2, doesn’t that invalidate it?

            Did you hear about the 18 yrs and 9 months with no warming? It was called the hiatus and AGW scientists offered dozens of explanations, one being aerosols, but they realized it invalidated their hypothesis, so they just changed the historical temps instead, and viola!, global warming was back!

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            You got to tell me what hypothesis? I’ve been waiting patiently for you to name the hypothesis but for some strange reason you are unable to do so.

          • Poseidon

            Read history. It repeats. It’s full of stories like this:

            “The Arctic Ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer, and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot. Reports from fishermen, seal hunters, and explorers all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone. Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes. Within a few years it is predicted that due to the ice melt the sea will rise and make most coastal cities uninhabitable.” — from an Associated Press report published in The Washington Post on Nov. 2, 1922.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Where was that reported from in the Arctic ocean? You need to be specific as there was no way for the whole Arctic ocean to be incorporated in that statement as humans didn’t have the technology or observation posts.

          • Poseidon

            Here’s just one: “Within a few years winter snowfall will become a very rare and exciting event. … Children just aren’t going to know what snow is.”

            David Viner, Climatic Research Unit, University of East Anglia, 20 March 2000

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            I hate to share this with you but that’s not a climate science prediction but someone’s opinion which is meaningless. Predictions will be found in published peer-reviewed science journals.

          • Poseidon

            The peer-review proves for anything related to global warming has been corrupted. It’s much like Rachel Carson where it was a circular process with her friends and colleagues reviewing each other’s work.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Absolute nonsense. It is quite obvious you are neither a scientist nor scientifically literate but rather obnoxiously nescient. Climate science is the only doubly peer-reviewed science thanks to the IPCC.

          • Poseidon

            The original hypothesis said rising CO2 will warm the polar regions.
            Then they said CO2 is the main driver of global warming.
            Then they said CO2 is the main driver of climate change.
            Then they said CO2 is the main driver of weather.
            Then they said CO2 is the main driver of extreme weather.
            Now they say CO2 is the biggest, imminent threat to life on the planet.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            That makes absolutely no sense. Can you give your source?

          • Poseidon

            Challenge: name something, anything that invalidates the hypothesis.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            I haven’t a clue of what you’re trying to express … you have written a load of gibberish. If you’re trying to regurgitate a theory or hypothesis then look it up and reference it and ask your question or pose your posit. Alternatively, is this some hypothesis you’re trying to formulate? If so I haven’t a clue what you’re trying to articulate … it’s a meaningless word salad.

          • Poseidon

            The entire hypothesis is bogus. Since all their predictions have proven wrong, now they say global warming causes everything.

            Name something, anything that will invalidate the hypothesis. Higher temps, colder temps, more storms, less storms, … anything?

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            What hypothesis? Why are you coy … they have titles .. I can’t guess which hypothesis you’re trying to articulate if you don’t spit it out. For example, the Attention Schema Theory (AST), developed over the past five years, suggests that consciousness arises as a solution to one of the most fundamental problems facing any nervous system: Too much information constantly flows in to be fully processed. The brain evolved increasingly sophisticated mechanisms for deeply processing a few select signals at the expense of others, and in the AST, consciousness is the ultimate result of that evolutionary sequence. If the theory is right—and that has yet to be determined—then consciousness evolved gradually over the past half billion years and is present in a range of vertebrate species.

          • Poseidon

            I been studying this since the late 90s. Yes I know all about the absorption properties of CO2 and albedo infrared….

            It’s a political issue, not scientific.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            If your research was as thorough as you imply, you should be turning up different results. Have any help/links from a scientist or scientifically literate person who knows what they’re doing?

  • disqus_VOtPhxsT9v

    Unprecedented !!!! I am anxious for the Obama crowd to go so I never need to hear that word again.

    • Leftwithrightbrain

      Warming at 30x natural is unprecedented. Just because you don’t like the language it won’t make that fact disappear.

      • disqus_VOtPhxsT9v

        You do know that the cooling we have experience over the last 16 years corresponds statistically much closer to sun activity than with CO2 emissions right?
        Your 2nd grade science teacher was right, the Sun warms the Earth.
        4th grade science: when the Earth warms the hydraulic cycle incorporates more moisture to the atmosphere making more rain, reducing desertification, increasing plants, crops and habitat.
        6th grade science: CO2 in the atmosphere is part of the great carbon recycling machine that is Earth.
        8th grade science: Scientific method. in conducting an experiment or explaining a phenomenon, testing is critical. When a model is based on a hypotheses and it doesn’t work, either the hypotheses is wrong or the theory it is based on is wrong.
        9th grade physics: Gasses, which do not posses the surface tension, may cannot retain heat within themselves. Water as gas clouds have special properties see 4th grade science.
        10 grade biology: More CO2 along with H2O creates a special organic chemical soup that together with micro organisms and eventually plants leads to regeneration of soft fertile soils on the surface to further promote the phenomenon unique in our solar system known as advanced life.
        I would keep going, but it seems you couldn’t get past the 4th grade.

  • Chris

    Hmm, another comment thread on a scientific, technical article littered with posts from idiots who can’t find anything else to discuss other than their stupid political leanings. This just goes to show how little education most people have. Mark Twain once quipped: “It is far better to remain silent and thought a fool then to open one’s mouth and remove all doubt.” Clearly none of these posters has read Mark Twain either, let alone studied the intricate cycles of our sun. Typical.

    • cdw

      Scientific research is many times funded by citizen stakeholders who care to have a say in the matter from time-to-time.

    • Terenc Blakely

      To paraphrase; “Shut up peasants.”

    • Sicilian Papa

      No, it shows we know something about politics and history. Some of the public doesn’t know the sun comes up in the east and sets in the west. Everyone knows the sun revolves around the earth. So stick it where the sun don’t shine.

    • Veritas

      I’m waiting for your on topic comment…….crickets…..

      This is not an American Literature article is it?

    • R. A.

      Twain also said “Lies, damned lies, and statistics” which the IPCC apparently made into its motto.

  • debthater

    Even the weather services are already predicting a cold winter coming up for much of the U.S. Get ready for a doozy, especially in places like the Midwest and Appalachians. Prolonged below zero temps are coming; say goodbye to your crepe myrtle and photinia.

  • Jose Ortega

    It’s better to have sub zero temps for 90 days than to suffer through south Florida broilers for close to 187 days.

    • Snailmailtrucker

      If you live in Central Fla. it can be pretty uncomfortable….
      Not so much on either coast !

      • Reality Blowz

        My friend’s ask as to why I want to retire in Florida. They say that it is too hot. Yet I can pull up the temperature on my phone and show them that it is 92° here right now with 72% humidity but only 89° in Florida with 60% humidity. Yet it was just snowing here 4 weeks ago.
        The winters are long and brutal. Your nose literally seals shut from the sub zero temps and it feels as if someone is whipping you in the face as soon as you walk out the door.
        Northern states should be deemed unfit for human occupancy from December to April.
        I wish that we could hibernate.

        • Veritas

          I refer to the nose sealing shut as “booger-freezing-cold” and experiencing should be on everyone’s bucket list

          • Reality Blowz

            Maybe I will not sell my Michigan home and just rent it out for winter “booger-freezing-cold” tours?

    • Reality Blowz

      You apparently are unfamiliar with temps in the north in the winter.
      That is why I am retiring to my Lake Davenport home from my Michigan home.
      You do not understand what grey dreary days are like for months on end, and what -28° with 30 mph wind feels like. It will kill you within 15 minutes if you are left stranded.
      I will take Florida with its yearly temperature swing of about 70° versus my present 120° swing.

  • jfhdsiu

    The good news is that greenhouse gases will keep us toasty warm through it all.

  • Jennifer P

    I think I heard on Headline News that climatologists are blaming President George Bush for the lack of sunspot activity.

  • Snailmailtrucker

    The scientific press often repeats that dark matter makes up “25% of the Universe” or that dark energy makes up “70% of the rest of the Universe.” To anyone familiar with plasma physics, it is well known that plasma makes up 99.99% of the Universe. It is a fascinating convergence that the amount of gravitational mass invented to save conventional theories is the same as the ionized plasma that is overlooked.

    Wal Thronhill
    http://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/daily-tpod/

    • Reality Blowz

      Why…that sounds like an Electric Universe.

      • R. A.

        I prefer Elastic Universe. Snap!

  • Snailmailtrucker

    God Bless Global Warming !
    God Bless President Trump !
    God Bless America !

  • Ash Land

    Global Warming is a terrible phenomenon. It now causes sun-spotless days. Obama told us he was the One the world was waiting for. He is here to tame the seas, the cause the tides to recede to to lower the sea levels. The Messiah act in strange ways that country folks like me cannot even contemplate. DC, NYC and coastal Elites, 93% Blacks, MSM know this messiah like no other.

  • merkinmuffy

    Thank God! For a minute there I thought they were going to tell me this means the sun is shutting down!

  • Sicilian Papa

    Global warming? Yeah it gets hot in the summer.

  • mary fisher

    America 2.0 coming soon. All Whites, Montana Idaho is a good start. Every American city is pathetic with black, hispanic gangs, must be cleaned up ASAP. The Donald can’t start soon enough. I will volunteer for free to help the round up.

    • Sicilian Papa

      You sound like a liberal trying too hard. They old smarmy Cole-Bert thing.

      • Stan

        Yeah, not much of an effort.
        The Commissar will not be putting an extra turnip in his lunch packet today!

  • Dennis

    It’s Bush Fault

    • Sicilian Papa

      He destroyed the sun from 2001-2008. Obama has been trying to fix it for 71/2 years.

      • morecotwo

        Obozo did say he would part the seas or something.

  • Grimm Bastard

    Is this why I am still wearing a jacket in summer?

    • Fire Marshal Bill

      Up here in Maine, it’s 5-10 degrees above the normal average.

      • morecotwo

        Maine is just a weird place, that’s all. Ya’ll like it thar?

      • morecotwo

        Maine is on the way to being like W. Virginia. All those hard working fisherman put out on the streets to beg for their lively hoods because of the econut DemRats. In the mean time all the lib elites walk on in.

  • morecotwo

    Thank God for AGW.

  • Reality Blowz

    Great. How long before a Liberal politician will demand a tax for this?

  • And the Earth cools. Global Cooling is a danger as a result. We need to subsidize carbon usage if we follow the logic of the global warmers. Ah but they are wrong so let’s not.

  • Joe M

    Well, we won’t need the sun when the world ends.

    • Reality Blowz

      The sun will be what causes the world to end when the sun swells up.

  • one-eyed sailor

    Oh, great! Now global warming is affecting the sun!

  • outofstep

    Caused by my suv and bovine flatulence

    • Leftwithrightbrain

      Bovine flatulence is not a problem … you should have paid more attention from grade 3 science classes onwards and you’d know that bovine eructation is the cause not flatulence.

      • R. A.

        I knew it. Vegans are destroying the planet by not eating cows.

      • outofstep

        That is not what they say now, I read the articles. Thought it was comical, but some “scientists” don’t think so.

        • Leftwithrightbrain

          Don’t know what you were reading but flatulence was never cited in science. Eructation yes and the dung itself to a lesser degree.

  • Dennis

    Trying to fix it for the wet backs?

  • Rudolph Von Galen

    This MUST be caused by Anthropogenic Global Warming… mustn’t it? We humans are just so awesome, so powerful! In fact, we’re about to blow ourselves out of existence with nuclear weapons…

  • Skunkenstein✓SkunK verified

    a thicket of magnetic fields AND ELECTRIC fields you freekin morons

  • tjk707

    It’s clear we humans are responsible for this. We must take action now! The future of our solar system lies in balance. Contact your senator and congressman today !

    • Rudolph Von Galen

      May the Force be with you!

    • pipercat

      The only hope is a massive tax on sun usage.

  • William Guessford

    We are about 10 years into a Grand Solar Minimum. Happens every 179 years. Google Dalton Minimum or Maunder Minimum.

  • Ron Uphoff

    Capt. Ron
    Can any one out their contact al gore and ask to put up a rainbow
    That would prove that he has been put in charge of the climate makers, and I will buy him a beer for happy hour when he shows up

  • Sanity&Reason

    It’s doing this because of climate change… (-:

  • moron

    Bill and HRC want to keep their greedy hands in the global warming bucket of gold.

  • Violet Warren
    • Stan

      A disease free prostitute should be making more than that….oh…wait…disease free….

      Carry on…

  • lgeubank

    There are solar cycles? Why didn’t all the Global Warming fanatics mention that? Couldn’t it be that cycles in sunspot activity might have something to do with cycles in global temperatures?

    I used to think sunspots were cooler regions of the sun (because they’re dark, see?). But after reading The Real Global Warming Disaster by Christopher Booker, I learned that sunspots are regions of GREATER sun activity. And that sunspots and cosmic ray activity have caused cycles in earth temperatures from time immemorial.

  • mollypo

    Democrats will now switch to “global cooling” as a big threat. Populated areas will freeze requiring mass migration or, more likely, mass immigration from the warm countries in the middle east, think Islam. Democrats will start taxing citizens for not driving enough and not driving fossil fueled cars because they are contributing to global cooling. Democrats will insist that coal be burned everywhere to stop the horror of global cooling. They will claim that global cooling will contribute to “hail stone” hurricanes and will propose taxes to erect large umbrellas over our cities to deflect the hail. No matter what the weather or climate democrats will tax it.

  • Paul Hacker

    Must be the SUV pollution. Now the sun has a carbon dioxide problem! Global warming is now Solar System Warming! Must produce more carbon credits!

    • Stan

      They only drive Priuses on the Sun.

      • R. A.

        I heard solar energy is the hottest thing going on the sun.

  • Stan

    “This was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow, and our planet began to heal, and the Sun’s acne cleared up.”

  • mw

    Somehow, someway by some pixie dust and mental gymnastics the Walking Left (Hillary, Pelosi, Reid, et al) will try to exploit this for their political advantage. Let’s see how many days this takes. They’ll probably just end up blaming Christians when they have nothing to come up with.

    • Veritas

      I bet they blame it on sunscreen manufacturing. We will need a tax to address the crisis…

    • Flechette

      They will blame it on guns and the NRA.

      • Veritas

        They are Anti-sun violence

        • Stan

          The Sun, man’s oldest enemy…

  • usathoughts

    From the Scientific Journal Nature. Not qualified to explain the Theory. But can give you the gist of it. An Astrophysics theory was recently confirmed by actual observation. It was peer reviewed, and accepted. The Sun is expected to exhibit unusual activity cumulating in about a decade. It is expected to last for three decades. Of course, the Sun may have other plans. Anyway, if the Sun performs as expected the Earth will experience a three decade cooling cycle. However, nothing to presage an ice age.

    The Climate Change people will love the consequences. These changes will not be predictable. They will impact on Regional Areas. As they progress prior changes will change again. The idea of Four Seasons will be in constant flux.

    When the Sun ends this cycle things will settle back down over a fairly short but unknown time period. They don’t say but would assume the changes to be somewhat permanent or at least gradual.

    From the Governments point of view this is great. Can Tax every change, blame it on the worlds people. If not that then on Bush. Perhaps too Sarcastic?

    This will sure put a dent in the Global Warming scenario.

    • Leftwithrightbrain

      I don’t believe you understood the paper. Care to share the citation?

      • usathoughts

        When first coming across it made notes. That was about six months past. No longer have a subscription to Nature nor Scientific America. Google Astrophysics – newly confirmed theory. Most likely will find a reference without having to pay for it. Bring up “Quora Digest” and pose the question.

        By formal training an electrical engineer. Know enough to translate the mathematics into common language.

        • Leftwithrightbrain

          Weak deflection … just provide the paper or admit you made up crapola and wrote a load of piffle.

          • usathoughts

            Don’t be so damn lazy. If really concerned do something about it, look it up.

            Anyway, what does it matter. You have but three choices; It occurs, It does not occur, or some modification. Due to my age could care less, just found the Theory mildly interesting.

            Read the Democrat Party platform. Looks like they will be involved with climate change and global warming. Those opposing them will surely raise this Theory as a defense. So just have patience.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            I do find it amusing that people will produce and argue for results using opinion and hearsay, and have to be dragged kicking and screaming to the primary science sources. Quote and cite the primary source or STFU.

          • usathoughts

            Have a short memory do you? It came from the Journal Nature.

            Don’t know why you even pursue this line? It is of little importance as there is nothing you can do about it. You do have a way with adjectives, give you that.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Hearsay is meaningless. Care to cite the paper.

          • usathoughts

            First it was short memory, now lack of comprehension. Are you going to just fade away?
            Well, looked up the notes. Sure enough wrote down the particulars. But guess what… not going to give it to you. Pick up the phone, call them, tell them what you are looking, ask for a reprint and pay for it just as I had to pay for the subscription. You are not only lazy but cheap. What other negative attributes do you have; sure there are many. You have got to be one of those inapt democrats! You have my condolences.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            OK. I’ll take that as your admission and concession that you have no citation for your fabricated junk science. Time for you to acquiesce and move on. Your humiliation was firmly established several comments back.

          • usathoughts

            Now you accuse me of junk science? Engineers do not do junk science, nor any science for that matter.

            Want junk science? Look to the Global Warming and Climate Change idiots. Never a citation, never list qualifications, Never published in a Peer Reviewed Journal. Not one Astrophysicist among the lot. Even the Farmers Almanack employs two and have a forecasting accuracy of 87 percent.

            Who denies Climate Change? Nobody. Any fool knows it will change with every breath.
            Who denies Global Warming? Nobody. Been going in cycles for many millions of years.
            Who denies Global Cooling? Nobody with more than two brain cells. It also cycles.

            So what is denied? The idiotic conclusions is a good place to start. A complaint is made against too much CO2. Well guess what? It is real good for growing plants to feed a growing world population. The plants put off Oxygen which bind with other gases to help clean the air.

            People are blamed for Global Warming and Climate Change? Why? Because governments can tax them. Can’t tax the real villains; The Sun. The Inclination of the Planet to the Sun. The eccentric wobble of the Planet. Volcanic eruptions, Periodic changes in Ocean Currents. These are primary. Mans activity is but a pinprick in comparison.

            I do concede I have been responding to someone border line retarded.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Nice deflection to avoid a simple science citation. Your jejune, pleonastic, truculent jeremiad of junk science shows why engineers are not scientists and very poor at research. When will engineers realize that they are not automatically scientific polymaths? Anyone in a physics department will tell you that an alarmingly large fraction of the relativity-disprovers, climate-deniers and other cranks submitting unsolicited manuscripts with bizarre theories-of-everything describe themselves as “retired engineers”. And to confirm your ignorance and leave no doubt as to your scientific illiteracy you make a classic science blunder about plants and CO₂. Obviously, you’re clueless to the biogeochemical, energy, landuse and temperature autotrophic drivers necessary for photosynthesis to occur. CO₂ alone does squat and too much decreases nutrient and protein yields in C3 and C4 vegetation. Ever studied the PNL hypothesis? Obviously not … here’s some science now go educated yourself:

            “Increasing CO₂ threatens human nutrition,” Samuel S. Myers et al, Nature, May 7, 2014, DOI: 10.1038/nature13179

            Projections for conditions under increased atmospheric CO₂ (drought) make this problematic for crops. In addition, research is showing that rice will not germinate at 35°C or above, and that many important crops become less nutritious when grown in elevated CO₂ levels. Consider the effect on agricultural productivity of the 2003 European or 2010 Ukraine/Russian heat wave. Then there is the problem of pest migration due to warmer temperatures. It all adds up to a very murky picture for agriculture in the later part of this century. That should make you less sanguine.

  • Jesse Jenkem

    I’m sure this is either Bush’s, Trump’s or all the Republican’s fault somehow.

    • Stan

      I blame global warming….oh…wait…you can’t blame global warming on global warming, can you?

  • saggypants

    global warming has more to do with the suns activity than scientist will admit. Seems cooling is on for this year and for the next few.

    • No, please google “Hottest years on record”. The Earth is getting warmer, but the sun is getting cooler? What are you talking about?

      • Stan

        Google ‘temperature adjustment’
        Or ‘satellite record’

        • Leftwithrightbrain

          UAH and RSS satellite record shows 0.12°C/decade warming trend which is an unprecedented 30x faster than last four natural warming cycles. Observations and measurements show that human-induced CO₂ into the atmosphere is the external forcing responsible for this warming. Gillett et al (DOI: 10.1029/2011GL050226) show the human attribution of the warming trend to be 102% of observed warming from 1851 to 2010 and 113% of the observed warming from 1951 to 2000 and 1961 to 2010 (averaged together)

          • Stan

            Wow!
            I guess someone will have to explain to you how long satellites have been up there, and how short a time that is in geological terms.
            And as they keep tampering with the surface records…..

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            It was you suggestion to Google satellite record … so what was your motive then to recommend that and now disown it? Your hearsay about tampering surface records is meaningless without verifiable evidence from authoritative sources which excludes the denierosphere.

          • Stan

            The satellite data does not confirm the surface record adjustments.
            I’m not disowning the satellite data, simply pointing out that it is the most accurate, but the period it covers is far too short to extrapolate any trends from.
            It can be both, accurate, and the period can be to short to predict any significant trend.

            You should learn a bit about science and logic.
            The satellite data covers 35 years, and the surface data is a massaged joke.
            Neither proves AGW in any way.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            simply pointing out that it is the most accurate

            You’re either delusional or a liar or grossly ignorant. Pick one. The satellite data measures the mid-troposphere through microwave radiometers, and is actually significantly more difficult to interpret than the ground-based observations. The idea that the satellites are some kind of truth-o-meter is really not correct at all. The differences between satellites and the surface are limited to those regions of the earth that have variable land cover – like SNOW covered areas. The satellite algorithms assume a constant emissivity and well … that’s just wrong. The satellite data are the MOST adjusted data we have. It is such an indirect measurement (more calculations) and a relatively new science, so it became and remains the most fudged. Manipulated. Or are you going to call it massaged? If massaged, then you’re going to have to admit that other data sets are correctly adjusted or homogenized and stop using denier terms.

            The rest of your comment is just pure bull$h!t and I must presume it is for the same reason you select to answer the above vacuity.

          • Stan

            So now you don’t understand temperature or geology.

            That’s too bad.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Mercifully you have escaped the ravages of intelligence due to suffering from cranium intra réctum since your youth. When you lose the argument do you always pretend that you have some knowledge when clearly you have squat as you so ably demonstrate repetitively.

          • Stan

            Why are you so hate filled?

            Is it because you finally understand the idea that 30 years of data does not confirm any long term trends?
            I know math is hard for you drama types….

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            We have data going back millions of years from many sources. The satellite data track well with the better datasets … so your argument is moot.

          • Stan

            Millions of years from many sources?
            How about 13 trees?

            That’s how many they used to produce the hockey stick graph, which was bogus.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Confirmation of the hockey stick (through 2013):
            1. 1998: K. R. Briffa, et al., Influence of volcanic eruptions on Northern Hemisphere summer temperature over the past 600 years, Nature, 393, 450-455, 4 June 1998
            2. 2000: T. J. Crowley, Causes of Climate Change over the Past 1000 Years, Science, 289, 270
            3. 2000: S. Huang, H. N. Pollack, P. Y. Shen, Temperature trends over the past five centuries reconstructed from borehole temperatures, Nature Letts., 403, 756-758
            4. 2002: C. Bertrand, et al., Climate of the last millennium: a sensitivity study, Tellus, 54,3,2210244, May
            5. 2002: J. Esper, Cook, Schweingruber, Low-Frequency Signals in Long Tree-Ring Chronologies for Reconstructing Past Temperature Variability, Science, 295, 5563, pp.2250-2253, Mar. 22, 2002
            6. T. M. Cronin et al., MWP, LIA, and 20th century temperature variability from Chesapeake Bay, Global Planetary Change, 36, 2003, 17-29
            7. 2004: H. N. Pollack, J. E. Smerdon, Borehole climate reconstructions: Spatial structure and hemispheric averages, J. Geophys. Res., 109, D11106, 9pp, 2004
            8. 2005: E. Jansen, et al., “Extracting a Climate Signal from 169 Glacier Records”, Science, 308,5722,675-677, Apr
            9. 2005: A. Moberg et al. Northern Hemisphere 2,000 year Temperature Reconstruction using low and high-res proxy data
            10. 2005: S. Rutherford, et al., “Proxy-Based Northern Hemisphere Temperature Reconstructions”, J.Clim,18, 2308-2329,2005
            11. 2005: R. Wilson, et al., “Highly variable Northern Hemisphere temperatures reconstructed from low/high-resolution proxy data”, Nature,433,7026,613-617,Feb2005
            12. 2006: R. D’Arrigo, et al., On the long-term context for late twentieth century warming”. J.Geophys.Res.,111(D3)
            13. 2006: T. J. Osborn, K.R. Briffa, “The Spatial Extent of 20th-Century Warmth in the Context of the Past 1200 Years”.Science311(5762):841-844,2006
            14. 2007: A. Moberg, et al., Ch 6: Palaeoclimate, IPCC 4th Assessment Report, 2007
            15. 2007: R. Wilson, et al., “A matter of divergence:Tracking recent warming at hemispheric scales using tree ring data”, J.Geophys.Res.,112,D17103,Sept2007
            16. 2007: J. Jouzel, et al., “Orbital and Millennial Antarctic Climate Variability over the Past 800,000 Years”, Science, 317,5839,793-797,Aug2007.
            17. 2007: M. Ammann and E. Wahl, Climatic Change, 85, 1-2 , 71-88
            18. 2007: M. N. Juckes, Millennial temperature reconstruction intercomparison and evaluation, Clim. Past, 3, 591-609, 2007
            19. 2007: Wilson et al. N. Hemisphere Tree-Ring-Based Temperature Reconstruction 1750-2005, J. Geophys. Res., 112, D17103, 11 Sept.
            20. 2007: E. R. Wahl, C. M. Ammann, Robustness of the Mann, Bradley, Hughes reconstruction of Northern Hemisphere surface temperatures: Examination of criticisms based on the nature and processing of proxy climate evidence, Climatic Change, 85:33-69, 2007
            21. 2008: A. Moberg, R. Mohammad, T. Mauritsen, Analysis of the Moberg et al. (2005)hemispheric temperature reconstruction, Clim. Dyn. 31, 7-8, 957-971, Dec. 2008
            22. 2009: D. S. Kaufman, et al., Recent Warming Reverses Long-Term Arctic Cooling, Science, 325, 1236 (2009)
            23. 2009: H. von Storch, Zorita, Gonzalez-Rouco, Assessment of three Temperature Reconstruction Methods in the Virtual Reality of a Climate Simulation, Int. J. Earth Sci. , 98, 1, 2009
            24/25. 2010: M.P. Tingley, P. Huybers, “A Bayesian Algorithm for Reconstructing Climate Anomalies in Space and Time. Part I: Development and Applications to Paleoclimate Reconstruction Problems”; Part II: Comparison with the Regularized Expectation-Maximization Algorithm”. J.Clim.23 (10):2759-2800,2010
            26. 2010: D. Frank, et al., A noodle, hockey stick, and spaghetti plate: a perspective on high-resolution paleoclimatology, WIREs, Climate Change, 1, 4, 507-516, July/Aug. 2010
            27. 2011: J. Martin-Chivelet, et al., Land surface temperature changes in Northern Iberia since 4000yrBP, based on δ13C of speleothems, Global and Planetary Change, 77,1-2, pp 1-12, 2011
            28. 2011: R. F. Spielhagen, et al., Enhanced Modern Heat Transfer to the Arctic by Warm Atlantic Water, Science, 331, 6016, pp. 450-453, 2011
            29. 2011: J. Oerlemans, Jan2011,Science Express Index “2500 Years of European Climate Variability and Human Susceptibility”
            30. 2012: F. C. Ljungqvist. et al., Northern Hemisphere temperature patterns in the last 12 centuries, Clim. Past, 8, 227-240, 2012
            31. 2012: R. Rohde, et al., A New Estimate of the Average Earth Surface Land Temperature Spanning 1753 to 2011, J. Geophys. Res.
            32. 2012:J. Gergis, et al., “Evidence of unusual late 20th century warming from an AUSTRALASIAN temperature reconstruction spanning the last millennium”, J. Climate
            33. 2012: T. Melvin, H. Grudd, K. R. Briffa, Potential bias in ‘updating’ tree-ring chronologies using regional curve standardisation: Re-processing 1500 years of Torneträsk density and ring-width data, Holocene, Oct. 26, 2012
            34. 2012: F. C. Ljungqvist, et al., Northern Hemisphere temperature patterns in the last 12 centuries, Clim. Past, 8, 227,240, 2012
            35. 2013: N. J. Abram, et al., Acceleration of snow melt in an Antarctic Peninsula ice core during the twentieth century, Nature Geosci., 6, 404-411 (see figs. 4 and 5)
            36. 2013: S. A. Marcott, et al., A Reconstruction of Regional and Global Temperature for the Past 11,300 Years, Science, 8, 339, 6124, 1198-1201

          • Stan

            Read and learn:
            https://www.amazon.ca/22A-Disgrace-Profession-22-Steyn-editor/dp/0986398330

            https://www.technologyreview.com/s/403256/global-warming-bombshell/

            I know admitting you have wasted your life on this scam is going to take some time to adjust too, but when you are in a hole, quit digging.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            You lost the argument and the science when you have to go to non-scientific science-denier sites. What are you going to do when Steyn loses and has to file bankruptcy to pay the damages. Pro tip: Steyn hasn’t been able to get one scientist climate expert or skeptic to join his defense team.

    • Leftwithrightbrain

      Sun has been in a cooling trend for 25 years and axial nutation forcings are also in a cooling trend… so why is the planet experiencing unprecedented warming?

  • Yes, the sun has been very unactive recently, which is partially why it’s so disturbing that 2016 is on pace to become the warmest year on record, (2015 was the previous record). Global warming is real. Climate change is real. Ocean acidification is real. Wake up.

    • saggypants

      go drink some more kool aid

      • Go inform yourself about science.

        • saggypants

          like the scientist who created the fake hockey stick graph. Right I’ll stick with the sun

          • Google “Hottest years on record”.

          • saggypants

            all coincide with high sun spot and solar wind activity. Cosmic waves are now active in causing high altitude clouds that are cooling the earth at this time.

          • wcplace

            “Google” most liberals on payroll!

          • saggypants

            google coolest years on record

          • The Bacon Stops Here

            The hottest years on record occurred LONG before any humans existed. Or any animals at all, for that matter.

        • Stan

          You global cooling deniers really crack me up.

          How much does Big Stupid pay you to post that drivel?

    • Stan

      Climate has always changed.
      Who would deny that?

      • Let me be more specific: dangerous climate destabilization created by human consumption.

        • saggypants

          go live in the woods in Alaska and leave the rest of the world alone with your nonsense.

          • That sounds lovely. Unfortunately I won’t stop telling people about this shit, because it’s terrifying and it’s real.

          • saggypants

            go stand in your safe zone you perv.

          • Go ahead, ignore the facts. Watch your Fox News, regurgitating opinions handed down from corporate America. Witless idiot.

          • Stan

            Speaking of regurgitated opinions….

            BTW, how are you going to save the planet from plant food?
            Any suggestions?

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            CO₂is not a food as it is not a source of energy. Again you fail at grasping grade 3 science. Were you home or bible schooled?

          • Stan

            So now you need a lesson in simple plant biology too?

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            I don’t think that is likely or possible from you especially as you made a grade 3 science error about CO₂. CO₂ is not food as it has zero joules or calories. When you’re finished coloring in your science books ask your mom or another adult to read to you how plants turn biogeochemical nutrients (fertilizers) using energy to form proteins and carbohydrates and the importance of water, sunlight, and temperature.

          • Stan

            You don’t understand that plants require CO2?
            That’s just sad, but what is even more sad you are trying to base your argument on it.

            And it you’re going to get nasty I’m burning another old tractor tire at the farm.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            That’s not what I wrote … there you go straight for the red herring/straw man fallacy. CO₂ fertilization does not work in isolation.

          • Stan

            So you are just totally lost in other words.

            Your war on plant food has become a quagmire…..

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Sign up for summer remedial reading and comprehension classes. If there’s not any published research that states exactly what you’re claiming, CO₂ is plant food, then there are two possibilities. (a) No one has shown this in the research, and there’s an opportunity to publish an important paper, or (b) no one else working in the field agrees with your conclusions.

          • Stan

            Your inability to understand simple concepts like plant biology is not my concern.
            Your ignorance is your problem, not mine.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Tell me about that plant food mechanism that only you know about in biology … don’t be coy … share … I’m always up for learning other science fields. Please proceed …

          • Stan

            “In a process called “photosynthesis,” plants use the energy in sunlight to convert CO2 and water to sugar and oxygen. The plants use the sugar for food—food that we use, too, when we eat plants or animals that have eaten plants — and they release the oxygen into the atmosphere.”

            Get it yet?
            The part about you being a delusional SJW?

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Pleased that I was able to teach you that CO₂ is not plant food. Took awhile but you eventually got to grade 3 level knowledge.

          • Stan

            So you have a reading comprehension problem.
            My condolences.

          • Randy Rogers

            What do you watch? MSNBC?

          • Stan

            yawn

        • wcplace

          You really need to consume 100 ml of Thorazine and take a nap!

          • That’s pretty psychologically revealing. If something is harming the planet, just take a sedative and relax, right? Unfortunately I’d like to do something to change the world in a positive direction.

          • wcplace

            Incorrect interpretation, I was stating that you are mentally ill and need to be medicated and restrained before you injure yourself or others!

          • Stan

            Take yourself out of the equation, save the Earth from your CO2 exhalations.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Simple grade 3 science has escaped you. The exhalation from living animals is carbon neutral to very slightly negative.

          • wcplace

            Take a cue from Ms O’Connor!

          • R. A.

            i.e., massive tax increases ftw!

          • Stan

            Is it wise to mix Thorazine and that much AGW Koolaid?

          • wcplace

            I believe it is exactly the therapy needed!

          • Stan

            If some is good, more might be better…

          • wcplace

            Good idea, lets do 500 ml iv push!

        • Stan

          Why worry about your fantasies?
          Climate has always changed, and there is nothing unusual about the recent changes.
          Try reality!

        • R. A.

          Climate destabilization? lol.

          There have been massive “climate destabilization” events all through earth’s long geological history. No one is agreed on what caused them, except for the KT event and now, the Younger Dryas, which were caused by impacts of cometary fragments.

          Saying human activities are causing climate destabilization is blatant fearmongering, since humanity is clearly not hurling a 4 mile diameter slushball at earth at 40k mph, and that is the only known cause of such destabilization.

      • Leftwithrightbrain

        Your straw man is as illy as ‘The Black Death in the middle ages is estimated to have killed more of Europe’s population than World War 2. This means that deaths during World War 2 were not unusual, and hence must be due to natural causes, not man-made’

        • R. A.

          And WWII ended, and human population is doing fine, whats your point?

    • Randy Rogers

      Inactive?

  • Abriana Zinich

    Global warmi…wait, what?

    • 2016 is on par to become the hottest year on record. (2015 was the hottest year before that) Jesus, you guys, read! Think, for even a second. If the sun’s on a cooling cycle, why is the Earth getting so much warmer? Why are droughts becoming more severe, wildfires raging in the entire western coast? Coral reefs dying? Oceans acidifying?

      • The Bacon Stops Here

        Stop using the Internet, television, and your air conditioner then if you want to make a difference.

        • Stan

          He already turned off his brain…

          • Randy Rogers

            There wasn’t much thermal output there to begin with

      • Stan

        Sorry, you lost me at blah blah blah..

        Think, if only for a second: why do they keep adjusting the temperature record to make the latest year appear to be the hottest?

        • R. A.

          Because it’s the tamperature record, obviously

        • Randy Rogers

          Dogs humping cats, oh my!

  • Stan

    Probably because then he would have two of them up there.

  • Stan

    I blame Brexit and Farage..

  • Admin Cat

    We are in a cooling trend. So when are the clowns gonna stop spraying the sky to block out the sun?

    • Leftwithrightbrain

      Did you buy up all the tin foil and duct tape at Walmart or did you leave some for others?

      • R. A.

        Bah! Tin foil sucks. Go aluminum, it has a bigger carbon footprint.

      • Admin Cat

        look up

      • Admin Cat

        Look Up

  • Charles___Darwin

    Gore will claim that the lack of sunspots is caused by global warming.

    • Stan

      Exactly!

      Send money.

  • I blame the racism of the cis-normal white European male patriarchy.

    And George Bush.

  • Stan

    Pay no attention to that large ball of fusing hydrogen up in the sky, it has no effect on the Earth’s temperature.

    • 2016 is set to become the warmest year on record. Google “Hottest years on record”.

      • Stan

        Been there, done that.
        Google ‘temperature adjustments.’

        • Leftwithrightbrain

          If your research was as thorough as you imply, you should be turning up different results. Have any links from a scientist or scientifically literate person who knows what they’re doing?

      • Stan

        What are you doing to save the planet, other than bombarding us with your bullshit?

      • Randy Rogers

        Depends on when, where and how doesn’t it. You like the cooked books?

  • Victor Cachat

    Invest in winter gear suppliers.
    And insulation manufacturers, and lawyers that specialize in suing climate change hoaxers.

    • The sun is cooling, and yet the Earth is getting…warmer. How do you explain that?

      • Stan

        Thumb on the scale, in other words, temperature record adjustments.

      • Victor Cachat

        Yes.
        The earth has not warmed for more than 18 years.
        But you would only know that if you did not allow the legacy mainstream media; the activists; and the bought and paid for grant and publicity seeking “scientists” be your only source for information.

        • There is a 97% consensus amongst climate scientist. That would constitute the biggest conspiracy in the history of science.

          • R. A.

            No there isnt, and consensus means jack in science anyway. The whole point of the scientific endeavor was to provide a way to break through consensus. That’s why they’re called “scientific breakthroughs”.

          • Victor Cachat

            Oh!
            My!
            God!

            That BS was debunked years ago.
            97% of the tiny fraction of “climate scientists” that were asked to respond to a survey that actually responded, agreed.
            https://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/05/30/the-myth-of-the-97-climate-change-consensus/
            And even a lot of them have changed their minds.

            That means that the vast majority have not even weighed in.

            AND: Science IS NOT CONSENSUS! It is PROOF and Replication of Results.

          • Randy Rogers

            They have um, vested interest in promoting their religion since it butters their bread

        • Leftwithrightbrain

          The earth has not warmed for more than 18 years

          You’re either delusional or a liar. Pick one. Exactly what is your source for information as it definitely isn’t peer-reviewed science.

          • Victor Cachat

            Neither.
            But you do a great job of projecting.

            Perhaps you should actually educate yourself.

            Start with wattsupwiththat.com
            or http://www.science20.com/
            or junkscience.com

            The data is the SAME data used by the people that lie to you.
            They just tell you that statistical noise is warming.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            I do find it amusing that people will produce and argue for results using data from non-scientific sources, and have to be dragged kicking and screaming to the primary sources. Why on earth wouldn’t you start with the primary sources in the first place? Because they don’t support your false assertion? There’s a plethora of published peer-reviewed science on the topic!

            Pro tip #1: Wattsupwiththat isn’t a science site. It’s a propaganda site trying to look like a science site, and failing more and more as it falls deeper and deeper into conspiracy theories and general crapola. Watts. Let that sink in for awhile. The guy who has no science background and has been wrong about just about everything he ever published. BEST ran his “grade A” station at his request, and they show the exact same warming. Watts slinked away without honoring his declaration that he’s conceded defeat if they showed the same warming. Watts has been wrong about ALL of his predictions, because he said the earth was cooling. And he was wrong about the stations and their overall reporting accuracy. He has no background in what he’s writing about, and it shows. BTW: he is also fed up with you deniers not understanding basic science.

          • Victor Cachat

            There you go folks.
            The left wing brain is impenetrable.
            The religious zealots of “Sciencism” will accept no facts that are not church doctrine.

            So certain are the willfully ignorant that they are “amused” as they ignore the truth.

            Have fun with your flat earth friends, luddite.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Interesting but you deflect very weakly and avoid explaining why go to secondary or tertiary non-scientific sites for science? Your last sentence is pure projection and describes you succinctly as you are apparently afraid of science … why?

          • Victor Cachat

            Wow!
            All those 11 cent words have just taken me down in defeat (not).
            And it is proof of one of the left’s favorite dodges.
            A flurry of words that essentially say nothing, prove nothing, but just allow you to get another post in.
            Why?

            Because you believe he who posts the most wins.

            Climate theory as spouted by the hoaxers has failed to predict anything, but has been adjusted to explain everything.

            We have not warmed since 1998, yet the claims every year are that we just had the hottest (fill in the blank ) ever.

            Being the energizer bunny of posters only makes you sad.

            And now you will insist upon the last word.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Do you always deflect with weak off-topic nonsense when you lose the point? Your disdain and ineptitude for English is because it is your second language or a lack of education? So back to the original crap you sprouted that you have yet to support with evidence from science:

            The earth has not warmed for more than 18 years

  • mark g.

    The sun. You mean that big yellow thing in the sky? No. You don’t understand. Surely you jest. All climate on earth is controlled by man-made CO2!!!

    • 2016 is set to beat 2015 for the Hottest Year on Record. The sun is cooling. How could the sun cooling explain the extreme heat, increased droughts, and wildfires raging across the Western U.S.?

      • Stan

        What increased droughts?
        Wildfires?
        There are many causes of wildfires, chief among them deranged Global Warming fanatics.
        Extreme heat?
        You mean it hasn’t been this hot since the last time it was this hot?

        Take your Thorazine and give us all a break from your bullshit.

        • Did you Google Hottest Year on Record? Yes, hot air absorbs moisture from plants (making them tinder) and decreases relative humidity, thereby increasing the duration and frequency of droughts, and wildfires. It’s a game of statistics. That alone won’t kill us, but we are approaching the tipping points of Arctic Amplification (when the ocean absorbs more heat because it is a black body, compared to ice, which reflects heat), and the melting of the Arctic Permafrost (which is a HUGE reserve of C02)

          Ever been to Montana? In 5 years, Glacier National Park will be gone. When this happens, and you you see a link on Drudge, maybe you’ll remember this moment and open your eyes.

          • Stan

            You are clearly delusional.
            We’ve always had wildfires, and climate is only one small factor in how many and how severe they are.
            Get a brain.

            I work in the Arctic, btw, and your horror stories are just another AGW fantasy.

            And you still haven’t answered what you are doing to save the planet, other than blowassing your AGW bullshit all over the place.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Yawns is spot on and you’re so far removed from reality that I must conclude that mercifully you have escaped the ravages of intelligence due to suffering from cranium intra réctum since your youth.

          • R. A.

            No one knows what reality is, exactly. Anyone who thinks they do know is philosophically and scientifically illiterate. And delusional.

            Have a nice day.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            You are being pedantic and obtuse. We know many things because they are repeatable such as acid +base will give salt +water without loss of mass.

          • R. A.

            Yes, but those things can only be accepted as “real” after making certain metaphysical assumptions about the nature of reality.

            Because, as I said….we don’t actually know what reality is, or even if there is such a thing. Descartes illustrated this very well. “I think, therefore I am” is as far as one can get in determining what is “real”. After that, it’s all stacks of assumptions and guesswork.

            And yes, I was being pedantic. I find that the best response to obnoxious elitism is a bit of calculated pedantry.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            That jejune jeremiad fails as it is almost as weak as the god of the gaps fallacy.

            stacks of assumptions and guesswork

            You’re either delusional or a liar. Pick one.

          • R. A.

            Nice refutation, lol.

      • Randy Rogers

        Arson?

  • ijams sum

    Cooler weather is sure too follow and we head too the solar minimum 2020 or so !
    Our magnetic field will shrink and weaken even more !
    Dire global warming folks will be saddened by the lack of accuracy of there computer models of C02 making it hotter again !
    Since that theory came out it CO2 has not been a reliable indicator so why not ?
    The basis of Global warming is C02 but it has failed to track too the models consistently.
    Bad Science is when politics involved , it appears the truth has been B.S.

    • Stan

      Sun was in their eyes, the dog ate their global warming, the car had a flat tire….

    • Leftwithrightbrain

      Absolutely nothing in your silly jejune comment is found in published science. Why make up crapola it just makes you look like an imbecile?

  • Canis Dirus

    There was a scientific paper released a coupe of years ago predicting a solar minimum. Unlike long term global temperature science, which is in its infancy, solar correlations has much better data correlations.
    Prediction? A mini ice age is coming.

    • Leftwithrightbrain

      Simple science is not your friend. We’re in an ice-age and the interglacial cycle. The glacial cycle is not due for tens of thousands of years.

      • Canis Dirus

        You can take it up with the scientists.
        As for being in an ice age now. yes, technically we are, since the strictest definition requires only that there be some year round ice.
        Yes, we are still in an ice age for the anally retentive folks like yourself.

        • Leftwithrightbrain

          Thank you for confirming that you are neither a scientist nor scientifically literate but rather obnoxiously nescient and a cretin to boot.

          • Canis Dirus

            Obviously you are not one either. You are anal retentive however. No one talks about us being in an ice age today. Except you.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Hmmm … I guess with your snark you just confirmed that science is like Sanskrit to you! Personal incredulity is meaningless. i always get a kick out of dumb uneducated science-deniers trying to make fun of scientists. If you don’t know the basics you won’t understand the problem.

          • Canis Dirus

            Yes, I should already realize that anal retentive people like you can’t just pull out of the condition.

  • Da St

    Now anthropogenic global warming is ruining the sun too.

    • Stan

      Yup, it’s been going downhill ever since Louis Armstrong was the first man to walk on the Sun.

      • Randy Rogers

        He should have waited until after dark to do that.

  • Stan

    Is that Yawns dummy going to explain what he is doing to save the planet, other than bombarding us with his AGW bullshit?

  • Stan

    Another bad day for the Global Cooling Deniers.

  • wGraves

    Oh, fine… so the Sun went out. The critical question is, how did Bush manage to accomplish it?

  • Mike Herman

    Algore went to all the trouble of flying his private jet around the world to warn you about your SUV, but did you listen? No, and see what you’ve done.

    • Al Gore is not a great spokesman for the issue. The solution is not carbon offsets, it’s a scaling back to the level of consumerism and pre-global market mindset to the level it was approximately in during the 1970’s.

      • Mike Herman

        So what are you doing on a computer?

  • Joseph Guidry

    Weakest Solar Cycle in a century? What a joke! Almost fell out of my chair. In case you haven’t been watching, this “11 Year Solar Cycle” theory is gone! Yep bye bye theory…. In fact the past 2 “Cycles” have been completely out of sync. There are no Solar Models able to predict Solar Activity with any level of certainty? The solar cycle was discovered in 1843… So tell me, what Scientist given the 4.5 billion years the Sun has existed would deem a cycle that has been tracked for 173 years to be immutable? The Sun has become unpredictable, and there is nothing they can do but let the press continue to report the existence of a Cycle that has dissolved before their eyes. To do otherwise would be to admit they lack the ability to predict solar output, thus they cannot say whether the Sun sill heat up for 10,000 years, or cool down for a thousand years. So why give money to attempt to do something about Climate Change when you have no idea what to do?

    • VegasRick

      When you look at the chart in the article and then don’t believe your lying eyes, you’ve gone past the tipping point into full delusion.

      • Joseph Guidry

        Wow, you are hopeless how about monitoring Solar Activity daily for the past 30 years. I guess you recognize the letters S O H O. Didn’t think so. You are listening to idiots. Tell me why didn’t they predict the 500 year flood? Tell me why if you study ACTUAL SOLAR SCIENCE you find that they have stated that the past two cycles DID NOT OCCUR at the 11 year period. So I roll out a chart that shows your a complete moron that means it is true.

        • Joseph Guidry

          Unless you are doing the study, you are collecting the date, you are monitoring sunspot activity, you would not know that these stories are complete lies. It is all to keep you locked into the Globalist plan to take over based upon Climate Change. They ABSOLUTELY have no ability to predict the weather beyond a couple of days even then they are mostly wrong. They likewise lack the ability to predict Solar output… FACT! Prove me wrong with actual data. You cannot, that data does not exist. the Real data proves that the Cycle has disappeared…

  • Shannon Martin

    Global Cooling … ???
    Nah. Nobody to blame or taxes to pay

  • Boris

    when there’s no more credit by 2020, and the whole world can’t borrow another rubble, will the illegal aliens walk back home?

  • Canada Bus Inc

    In fact, the famous “shitstorm” known as the Monika Lewinski Event occurred during a heavy menstrual cycle.

  • willie phuister

    what is the correlation, if any, to climate change. if none, does this cycle mitigate climate change or make it worse. or is everything just a big ass guess?

    • I’m Available

      Since we can’t tax what happens on the sun, I think they will stick with the man made theory.

  • It’s Bush’ fault! Manmade global warming did this!
    Do you really need the /sarc tag?

    • I’m Available

      Yes, had he signed the Kyoto agreement, we would all be shivering right now. 😉

  • Perplexed

    La Nina and a quiet star. I’d bet on a wet, cold rest of 2016.

  • Jim

    It does not matter. Minimum, Maximum ‘0’ will keep trying to figure out some way to redistribute whatever is left that isn’t nailed down. Fortunately, we have only five more months to endure his plundering ways. Then, like water on Oz’s wicked witch, he will melt away into infamy. His legacy not to be as fondly remembered as he had hoped.

  • silverwombat

    I always thought it was sunspots that turned the American public in Birther-Whitewater ranting ratbags.
    But after reading the puerile, juvenile comments below, I realize you’re just crazy and you deserve the hell that will befall you all if you ever elect your new hero Donald Trump.

    • Jay_tea

      With all your help we can make America great again in no time. I always wished I was so enlightened myself.

    • Jim
    • Leftwithrightbrain

      Von Drumpf is going to make America Great Again by getting Hillary and Dems elected. He has no policies other than slogans of “make America segregate again” which is popular among our bottom feeders or you might remember Donald for such classics as, “I have the world’s best memory,” “There’s nobody bigger or better at the military than I am,” and “Sorry losers and haters, but my I.Q. is one of the highest—and you all know it!” How is he going to get Mexico to pay for the wall when he can’t even get supporters to pay for his campaign?

  • <—————————————————————————-

  • RegisteredDemocrat

    PROOF this is man made global warming caused by Bush due to fracking!

    END FRACKING ON THE SUN NOW!

  • phillip davis

    I remember back in 1362 the sun was doing the same thing. It was hotter than a sum bitch in the summer , but colder than a witches tit in the winter. My sister had a few 100 rats to play with, so she was happy. My father came home from the potato field one day, and told us the sun was asleep again.

    • Leftwithrightbrain

      There were no potato fields in 1362.

  • Butch

    The Federal Gov. will soon be putting into place a “Sunspot Activity Or Lack Of Tax.”

  • waffenss

    It’s global warming and the sun spots have been stolen by the estrogen free hag, the spots can be retrieved on her e-mail server.

  • Scriptor

    The Sun clearly needs to come to the Hill and testify before Congress. It needs to stop its shenanigans and support of climate change. It might be contributing to a cooling period right now, but just wait! It will come back stronger than ever.

    • Leftwithrightbrain

      The sun has been in a slight decline for the past 25 years and axial orbital nutation forcings put Earth in a natural cooling cycle … yet the planet is warming at unprecedented 30x faster than the last four natural interglacial warming cycles due to human induced CO₂ into the atmosphere.

      • Churyl Minne

        Yes that tiny fractional increase of 0.04% of the atmosphere really changes things huh? Temperature recordings have been manipulated and are relative to your point of reference. There is no evidence that the slight changes in CO2 levels have anything to do with anything except produce bigger crop yields. For my money, I’d go try to salvage the remainder of the rain forest which cannot be easily replaced rather than institute a misguided and corrupt carbon tax system.

        • Leftwithrightbrain

          First sentence correct. Second and third vacuity. I’ll ignore the balance as meaningless prejudiced feelings.

          • Churyl Minne

            Deflect and deny but can’t prove anything. Typical of the left.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            No defection cupcake. I answered seriatim. One can not be more direct than that.

          • Churyl Minne

            No you didn’t sweetie. You just dismissed them with no evidence to support your hypothesis.

            Math and science weren’t your strongest in HS were they?

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Argue you all you want but I answered seriatim. First, they weren’t my assertions (not hypothesis as you misuse so I wonder if you did science at school?). Second, the burden of proof is on you. Third, as to math there was none involved so I must conclude you didn’t do that at school either.

          • Churyl Minne

            Your “hypothesis” is that global warming exists. You haven’t proven it. Thus you deflect yet again. If there really was hard evidence to support your assertion, I’d consider it.

            A tiny fraction increase of a small percentage is MATH. Obviously you exaggerate the importance of this gas. You believe that a loose association exists between CO2 levels and global climate events. Maybe but correlations do not mean causation.

            Anytime you want to discuss science I’d be happy to oblige.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Your “hypothesis” is that global warming exists

            I made no such assertion.

            Thus you deflect yet again

            You’re either delusional or a liar. Pick one.

            A tiny fraction increase of a small percentage is MATH

            Nope. It is volume. And it is a very simple physics exercise to calculate it’s impact on the surface of the Earth plus we have paleoclimatological and geological records records that clearly show it’s the planet’s thermostat. That “tiny fraction” of gas if it were H₂S would be fatal for you.

          • agwscam

            Notice how the ignorant leftist trash always ‘ignore’ anything that contradicts their beliefs. Real ‘sciency’ stuff there!!!

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            I didn’t ignore anything. I answered every part of the junk science and ignored the commentators vacuous opinions.

          • agwscam

            You’re a comment section troll on the internet – and clearly a legend in your own mind. Too stupid to ever understand or admit that you were wrong. Try to get a real education somewhere or some psychiatric help.

      • Scriptor

        Please, don’t make me laugh. The ice caps have increased in size. We are in danger of a mini ice age.

        • Leftwithrightbrain

          You can go and look at them in real time and see what an idiotic statement you just made. Do you always segue off-topic when you don’t know how to answer the evidence?

          • Scriptor

            You’re stupid, man. It’s in plain sight for any idiot to see. I’m not looking at the cooked books. I’m reading actual data, from real scientists. Google map it, idiot.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Real time is not found in books. If your research was as thorough as you imply, you should be turning up different results. Have any help/links from a scientist or scientifically literate person who knows what they’re doing?

          • Scriptor

            A majority of scientists disagree with global warming. Proven fact. Didn’t Gore say we’d be underwater by this time? HA.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            You’re segueing off-topic into bull$h!t. You need to provide evidence for your ice-cap vacuity or concede that you were wrong.

          • Scriptor

            No I don’t, actually. You need to go do some research. If you’ve ever been to college or graduate school, you should know how to be independent and, well, do your own research.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Clearly you haven’t been to college let alone graduate school. My grand kids in elementary school know how to find the polar ice data in real time … why can’t you? Here let me help you http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/. You’ll notice that it shows you were/are FOS.

          • Scriptor

            You mean they know where to find doctored data? Good for them, I’m happy for their early indoctrination.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            You’re a nescient git who is either a pernicious fool, a perfidious charlatan or mendacious obscurantist. Pick one.

          • Scriptor

            You are just an idiot. That’s it.

          • agwscam

            Just like with all articles related to the climate change scam we have one fanatic/idiot on here spamming every comment with their lies and propaganda. Only two possibilities here; he’s a troll paid pennies to spend all day spamming -or- he’s actually so stupid that he thinks he’s fighting to ‘save the planet’. I actually think Leftwithnobrain is one of those laughable pieces of human trash who bought into the whole climate change scam because it gives meaning to his otherwise worthless and insignificant life.. .

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Q. Why can’t science-deniers understand the difference between science and a scam?A. Because they are uneducated, nescient, science-deniers, of course and are those kids that always lose, and rather than getting better, they just claim everyone else cheats or it’s a conspiracy to fool them.

          • agwscam

            The really laughable point is that when this idiot types his drivel like that above, think about the fact that he is saying these ridiculous pathetic statements about people like Freeman Dyson and Richard Lindzen – and thousands of other scientists who are accomplished and respected leaders and visionaries in their fields. YOU on the other hand are nobody. A worthless pathetic comment section troll on the internet.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Scroll up to see how your hero Lindzen actually fares in the real scientific world.

          • agwscam

            “The
            common enemy of humanity is man.
            In searching for a new enemy to
            unite us, we came up
            with the idea that pollution, the threat of
            global warming,
            water shortages, famine and the like would fit
            the bill. All these
            dangers are caused by human intervention, and
            it is only through
            changed attitudes and behavior that they can be
            overcome.
            The real enemy then, is humanity itself.”

            Club of Rome,
            premier environmental
            think-tank,
            consultants to the United
            Nations

            ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

            “We
            need to get some broad based support,
            to capture the public’s
            imagination…
            So we have to offer up scary scenarios,
            make
            simplified, dramatic statements
            and make little mention of any
            doubts…
            Each of us has to decide what the right balance
            is
            between being effective and being honest.”
            – Prof.
            Stephen Schneider,
            Stanford Professor of Climatology,
            lead
            author of many IPCC
            reports

            ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

            “We’ve
            got to ride this global warming issue.
            Even if the theory of
            global warming is wrong,
            we will be doing the right thing in terms
            of
            economic and environmental policy.”
            – Timothy
            Wirth,
            President of the UN Foundation

            ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

            “No
            matter if the science of global warming is all phony…
            climate
            change provides the greatest opportunity to
            bring about justice
            and equality in the world.”
            – Christine
            Stewart,
            former Canadian Minister of the
            Environment

            ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

            “The
            data doesn’t matter. We’re not basing our recommendations
            on the
            data. We’re basing them on the climate models.”
            – Prof.
            Chris Folland,
            Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and
            Research

            ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

            “The
            models are convenient fictions
            that provide something very
            useful.”
            – Dr David Frame,
            climate modeler,
            Oxford
            University

            ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

            “I
            believe it is appropriate to have an ‘over-representation’ of the
            facts
            on how dangerous it is, as a predicate for opening up the
            audience.”

            Al Gore,
            Climate Change
            activist

            ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

            “It
            doesn’t matter what is true,
            it only matters what people believe
            is true.”
            – Paul Watson,
            co-founder of
            Greenpeace

            ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

            “The
            only way to get our society to truly change is to
            frighten people
            with the possibility of a catastrophe.”
            – emeritus
            professor Daniel
            Botkin

            ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

            “The
            climate crisis is not a political issue, it is a moral and
            spiritual
            challenge to all of humanity. It is also our greatest
            opportunity
            to lift Global Consciousness to a higher level.”

            Al Gore,
            Nobel
            Peace Prize acceptance
            speech

            ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

            “We
            are on the verge of a global transformation.
            All we need is the
            right major crisis…”
            – David Rockefeller,
            Club
            of Rome executive
            member

            ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

      • agwscam

        The planet is not warming at unprecedented rate – until the criminals in the climate division of NASA/NOAA alter the data to fit the agenda of their sole source of funding – the zealots in the Obama administration.

        • Leftwithrightbrain

          I’d wager you have no evidence from published science sources for your vacuity and hearsay.

          • agwscam

            Actually you’re a liar and an idiot because there is plenty of documented scientific evidence of the data manipulation. Very easy for anybody to find, except for you anti-science fools who joined a cult and will never admit you were wrong – or read anything that conflicts with your new religion.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            because there is plenty of documented scientific evidence of the data manipulation

            I’m always suspicious of scientifically illiterate people who make broad claims but never provide any evidence from published peer-reviewed science sources. So do you have any citations?

            Q. Why can’t science-deniers understand the difference between science and religion?A. Because they are uneducated nescient science-deniers, of course and it doesn’t push their prejudiced and non-scientific narrative devoid of evidence that requires belief.

          • agwscam

            The really laughable point is that when this idiot types his drivel like that above, think about the fact that he is saying these ridiculous pathetic statements about people like Freeman Dyson and Richard Lindzen – and thousands of other scientists who are accomplished and respected leaders and visionaries in their fields. YOU on the other hand are nobody. A worthless pathetic comment section troll on the internet…

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Are you referring to the old codger Lindzen that decided to ruin his stellar career by becoming a fossil fuel paid shill and a laughing stock who had to resign his Emeritus professorship and got soundly trashed in court in April 2016 along with his fellow shills Spencer and Happer? Your eminent team relying extensively on non-peer-reviewed reports, WUWT, Think Tank Mumbo Jumbo (Cato, Heartland, etc.) got their butts handed to them such that cost of carbon pollution per ton will increase from $0.44 – 4.53 to $11 – 57. The salient points from the judicial conclusions are:22. The Administrative Law Judge concludes that Peabody failed to demonstrate that an equilibrium climate sensitivity of 1 or 1.5°C is correct.23. The Administrative Law Judge concludes that the climate sensitivity is reasonably considered to be in the 2-4.5°C range.47. The Administrative Law Judge concludes that Peabody failed to demonstrate that the relied upon process is neither peer-reviewed nor transparent.Share that with your fellow science-denier proselytizers. I bet Peabody is not only hurting from the exorbitant fees charged by your high priests but the long-term concomitant 1250% hike in carbon pollution per ton will be exacerbated as this spreads to other States. Science prevails over religious superstitions yet again!

          • agwscam

            It’s really too bad that you’re just a worthless internet troll, otherwise Lindzen could sue you for slander. But you’re just ignorant anti-science human trash that will never accomplish anything except annoying other people with your cult beliefs and slandering people with much greater minds and accomplishments than you could even dream of!

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Can’t sue for truth cupcake. You can use the link and read the documents and proceedings for yourself.

          • agwscam

            Ohhh…’cupcake’! Notice the common arrogance just dripping from every one of these propaganda tantrums thrown by the climate change believers. Keep these pieces of arrogant human trash as far away from the wealth and power they seek as possible. You will not like the world we live in if they succeed!

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Your jejune, pleonastic, truculent jeremiads are embarrassing for Team Science Denial.

          • agwscam

            Somebody’s mommy bought them a thesaurus app for their birthday!!!

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Your disdain and ineptitude for science also covers English. I am assuming your parents are every bit as stupid, ignorant, superstitious and uneducated as you are and, therefore, are proud of their little bundle of rétard?

          • agwscam

            Ahhh…the Alamo of the warmist cult…”you’re a stupid-head”!

  • Lurch47

    Oh NOES! Are we all going to freeze to death NOW?

    • Leftwithrightbrain

      Nope. Solar has been cooling for the past 25 years. We know why it won’t cool.

      • agwscam

        Just like with all articles related to the climate change scam we have
        one fanatic/idiot on here spamming every comment with their lies and
        propaganda. Only two possibilities here; he’s a troll paid pennies to
        spend all day spamming -or- he’s actually so stupid that he thinks he’s
        fighting to ‘save the planet’. I actually think Leftwithnobrain is one
        of those laughable pieces of human trash who bought into the whole
        climate change scam because it gives meaning to his otherwise worthless
        and insignificant life..

        • Leftwithrightbrain

          Q. Why can’t science-deniers understand the difference between science and a scam?A. Because they are uneducated, nescient, science-deniers, of course and are those kids that always lose, and rather than getting better, they just claim everyone else cheats or it’s a conspiracy to fool them.

          • agwscam

            ..The really laughable point is that when this idiot types his drivel like that above, think about the fact that he is saying these ridiculous pathetic statements about people like Freeman Dyson and Richard Lindzen – and thousands of other scientists who are accomplished and respected leaders and visionaries in their fields. YOU on the other hand are nobody. A worthless pathetic comment section troll on the internet.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Projection of personal fault is puerile.

          • agwscam

            Notice how the internet troll has no intelligent response, typical when they lose an argument.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            You can have the highest IQ on the planet … without education, knowledge and experience you will remain ignorant as you so perfectly demonstrate.

          • agwscam

            Imagine this piece of anti-science internet trash calling Freeman Dyson and Richard Lindzen and the thousands of other scientists who have debunked the climate change scam ‘ignorant’! Seems like every one of these climate change dolts has the same superman complex with a healthy dose of narcissism throw in the make them truly repulsive!

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            I don’t see either of those two up for a Nobel prize that would be awarded for the greatest discovery in modern physics that would overturn 200 years of science. So where to you act out your deluded fantasies besides the internet? Richard Lindzen the climate science denier has been shown to be fraud. He accepts money from the fossil fuel industry despite lying about it for years. You’ll be surprised to find out that he supports AGW theory, too.

          • agwscam

            ~~~

            “My life as a climate lukewarmer”

            http://bit.ly/1DcP7Nd

            ~~~

            “Critical Thinking on Climate Change”

            http://1.usa.gov/1PqAEWo

            ~~~

            “The origins of the corruption of science: Climate Science: Is it
            currently designed to answer questions?”

            http://bit.ly/1GFzC1y

            ~~~

            “The Fanaticism of the Apocalypse: Save the Earth, Punish Human
            Beings”

            http://amzn.to/1OuUY9U

            ~~~

            “Tell me why”

            http://bit.ly/1k14BjX

            ~~~

            “Global Warming ‘Fabricated’ by NASA and NOAA”

            http://bit.ly/1pDQkbx

            ~~~

            “Massive Alteration Of NASA Temperature Data Since 1999”

            http://bit.ly/1OuV0hQ

            ~~~

            “The fiddling with temperature data is the biggest science scandal
            ever”

            http://bit.ly/1EPYB5d

            ~~~

            “NASA Data Tampering Has Destroyed The Global Temperature Record”

            http://bit.ly/1NDSBBs

            ~~~

            “1350+ Peer-Reviewed Papers Supporting Skeptic Arguments Against ACC/AGW
            Alarmism” http://bit.ly/1ghTKuv

            ~~~

            “The Great American Bubble Machine” (BUBBLE #6 Global Warming):

            http://rol.st/1aFG9Pu

            ~~~

            “Chain of Environmental Command: How a Club of Billionaires and Their
            Foundations Control the Environmental Movement and Obama’s EPA”

            http://1.usa.gov/1LimNwc

            ~~~

            “United Nations Admits Climate Change Is About Undoing Capitalism”

            http://bit.ly/1L92h3h

            ~~~

            “We should all want to be wise and careful stewards of the beautiful
            planet we call home. But…”

            http://green-agenda.com/

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            So you are gullible and easily duped and can’t figure out why their is no Nobel (or any physics or climate science awards/prizes) in their future. You’re either very afraid of reality or your pugnacious disdain and ineptitude for science turns you into a garrulous and truculent wimp.

          • agwscam

            Partial list of scientists who do NOT support the Catastrophic Anthropogenic Climate Change Scam…look at all the Nobel Prize winners…

            A.J.
            Tom van Loon, PhD

            Aaron Klug, Nobel Prize (Chemistry)

            Abdus Salam, Nobel Prize (Physics)

            Adolph Butenandt, Nobel Prize (Chemistry)

            Al Pekarek, PhD

            Alan Moran, PhD

            Albrecht Glatzle, PhD

            Alex Robson, PhD

            Alister McFarquhar, PhD

            Amo A. Penzias, Nobel Prize (Physics)

            Andrei Illarionov, PhD

            Anthony Jewish, Nobel Prize (Physics)

            Anthony R. Lupo, PhD

            Antonino Zichichi, President of the World Federation of Scientists.

            Arthur L. Schawlow, Nobel Prize (Physics)

            Arthur Rorsch, PhD

            Asmunn Moene, PhD

            Baruj Benacerraf, Nobel Prize (Medicine)

            Bert Sakmann, Nobel Prize (Medicine)

            Bjarne Andresen, PhD

            Boris Winterhalter, PhD

            Brian G Valentine, PhD

            Brian Pratt, PhD

            Bryan Leyland, International Climate Science Coalition

            Cesar Milstein, Nobel Prize (Physiology)

            Charles H. Townes, Nobel Prize (Physics)

            Chris C. Borel, PhD

            Chris Schoneveld, MSc (Structural Geology)

            Christian de Duve, Nobel Prize (Medicine)

            Christopher Essex, PhD

            Cliff Ollier, PhD

            Daniel Nathans, Nobel Prize (Medicine)

            David Deming, PhD (Geophysics)

            David E. Wojick, PhD

            David Evans, PhD (EE)

            David Kear, PhD

            David R. Legates, PhD

            Dick Thoenes, PhD

            Don Aitkin, PhD

            Don J. Easterbrook, PhD

            Donald A. Glaser, Nobel Prize (Physics)

            Donald Parkes, PhD

            Douglas Leahey, PhD

            Dudley R. Herschbach, Nobel Prize (Chemistry)

            Edwin G. Krebs, Nobel Prize (Medicine)

            Erwin Neher, Nobel Prize (Medicine)

            Frank Milne, PhD

            Fred Goldberg, PhD

            Fred Michel, PhD

            Freeman J. Dyson, PhD

            Garth W. Paltridge, PhD

            Gary D. Sharp, PhD

            Geoff L. Austin, PhD

            George E. Palade, Nobel Prize (Medicine)

            Gerald Debreu, Nobel Prize (Economy)

            Gerhard Herzberg, Nobel Prize (Chemistry)

            Gerrit J. van der Lingen, PhD

            Hans Albrecht Bethe, Nobel Prize (Physics)

            Hans H.J. Labohm, PhD

            Harold E. Varmus, Nobel Prize (Medicine)

            Harry M. Markowitz, Nobel Prize (Economics)

            Harry N.A. Priem, PhD

            Heinrich Rohrer, Nobel Prize (Physics)

            Hendrik Tennekes, PhD

            Henrik Svensmark, physicist

            Herbert A. Hauptman, Nobel Prize (Chemistry)

            Horst Malberg, PhD

            Howard Hayden, PhD

            I. Prigogine, Nobel Prize (Chemistry)

            Ian D. Clark, PhD

            Ian Plimer, PhD

            Ivar Giaever, Nobel Prize (Physics)

            James J. O’Brien, PhD

            Jean Dausset, Nobel Prize (Medicine)

            Jean-Marie Lehn, Nobel Prize (Chemistry)

            Jennifer Marohasy, PhD

            Jerome Karle, Nobel Prize (Chemistry)

            Joel M. Kauffman, PhD

            Johan Deisenhofer, Nobel Prize (Chemistry)

            John Charles Polanyi, Nobel Prize (Chemistry)

            John Maunder, PhD

            John Nicol, PhD

            Jon Jenkins, PhD

            Joseph Murray, Nobel Prize (Medicine)

            Julius Axelrod, Nobel Prize (Medicine)

            Kai Siegbahn, Nobel Prize (Physics)

            Khabibullo Abdusamatov, astrophysicist at Pulkovo Observatory of the Russian
            Academy of Sciences

            Klaus Von Klitzing, Nobel Prize (Physics)

            L. Graham Smith, PhD

            Lee C. Gerhard, PhD

            Len Walker, PhD

            Leon Lederman, Nobel Prize (Physics)

            Linus Pauling, Nobel Prize (Chemistry

            Lord Alexander Todd, Nobel Prize (Chemistry)

            Lord George Porter, Nobel Prize (Chemistry)

            Louis Neel, Nobel Prize (Physics)

            Lubos Motl, PhD

            Madhav Khandekar, PhD

            Manfred Eigen, Nobel Prize (Chemistry)

            Marcel Leroux, PhD

            Marshall W. Nirenberg, Nobel Prize (Medicine)

            Max Ferdinand Perutz, Nobel Prize (Chemistry)

            Nils-Axel Morner, PhD

            Olavi Kärner, Ph.D.

            Owen Chamberlain, Nobel Prize (Physics)

            Pierre Lelong, Professor

            Pierre-Gilles de Gennes, Nobel Prize (Physics)

            R. Timothy Patterson, PhD

            R. W. Gauldie, PhD

            R.G. Roper, PhD

            Raphael Wust, PhD

            Reid A. Bryson, Ph.D. D.Sc. D.Engr.

            Richard Laurence Millington Synge, Nobel Prize (Chemistry)

            Richard Mackey, PhD

            Richard R. Ernst, Nobel Prize (Chemistry)

            Richard S. Courtney, PhD

            Richard S. Lindzen, PhD

            Rita Levi-Montalcini, Nobel Prize (Medicine)

            Roald Hoffman, Nobel Prize (Chemistry)

            Robert H. Essenhigh, PhD

            Robert Huber, Nobel Prize (Chemistry)

            Robert M. Carter, PhD

            Robert W. Wilson, Nobel Prize (Physics)

            Roger Guillemin, Nobel Prize (Medicine)

            Ross McKitrick, PhD

            Roy W. Spencer, PhD

            S. Fred Singer, PhD

            Sallie Baliunas, astrophysicist Harvard

            Salomon Kroonenberg, PhD

            Sherwood B. Idso, PhD

            Simon van der Meer, Nobel Prize (Physics)

            Sir Andrew Fielding Huxley, Nobel Prize (Medicine)

            Sir James W. Black, Nobel Prize (Medicine)

            Sir John Kendrew, Nobel Prize (Chemistry)

            Sir John R. Vane , Nobel Prize (Medicine)

            Sir John Warcup Cornforth, Nobel Prize (Chemistry)

            Sir. Nevil F. Mott, Nobel Prize Winner (Physics)

            Sonja A. Boehmer-Christiansen, PhD

            Stanley Cohen, Nobel Prize (Medicine)

            Stephan Wilksch, PhD

            Stewart Franks, PhD

            Syun-Ichi Akasofu, PhD

            Tadeus Reichstein, Nobel Prize (Medicine)

            Thomas Huckle Weller, Nobel Prize (Medicine)

            Thomas R. Cech, Nobel Prize (Chemistry)

            Timothy F. Ball, PhD

            Tom V. Segalstad, PhD

            Torsten N. Wiesel, Nobel Prize (Medicine)

            Vincent Gray, PhD

            Walter Starck, PhD (marine science; specialization in coral reefs and
            fisheries)

            Wibjorn Karlen, PhD

            Willem de Lange, PhD

            William Evans, PhD

            William Happer, physicist Princeton

            William J.R. Alexander, PhD

            William Kininmonth M.Sc., Head of Australia’s National Climate Centre and a
            consultant to the World Meteorological organization’s Commission for
            Climatology

            William Lindqvist, PhD

            William N. Lipscomb, Nobel Prize Winner (Chemistry)

            Willie Soon, astrophysicist Harvard

            Yuan T. Lee, Nobel Prize (Chemistry)

            Zbigniew Jaworowski, PhD

            Zichichi, PhD

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Nice list … useless without their peer-reviewed climate science papers. Did you copy that from the phone book?

          • agwscam

            Freeman Dyson: a brilliant physicist who many regard as
            Einstein’s successor:

            http://blog.nj.com/njv_paul_mulshine/2013/04/climatologists_are_no_einstein.html

            Harrison H. Schmitt and william happer: Mr. Schmitt, an adjunct
            professor of engineering at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, was an Apollo
            17 astronaut and a former U.S. senator from New Mexico. Mr. Happer is a
            professor of physics at Princeton University and a former director of the
            office of energy research at the U.S. Department of Energy:

            http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424127887323528404578452483656067190

            *49 Former NASA Scientists Send A Letter Disputing Climate
            Change

            http://www.businessinsider.com/nasa-scientists-dispute-climate-change-2012-4#ixzz35gYussx7

            *60 Scientists call on Harper to revisit the science of global
            warming

            Open Kyoto to debate

            http://www.nationalpost.com/story.html?id=3711460e-bd5a-475d-a6be-4db87559d605

            Open letter to UN Secretary-General: Current scientific
            knowledge does not substantiate Ban Ki-Moon assertions on weather and climate,
            say 125-plus scientists:

            http://opinion.financialpost.com/2012/11/29/open-climate-letter-to-un-secretary-general-current-scientific-knowledge-does-not-substantiate-ban-ki-moon-assertions-on-weather-and-climate-say-125-scientists/

            ‘Consensus’ Takes Another Hit! More than 60 German Scientists
            Dissent Over Global Warming Claims! Call Climate Fears ‘Pseudo ‘Religion’; Urge
            Chancellor to ‘reconsider’ views [Update: August 9, 2009: Organizers released
            the names of 64 more scientists who endorse the Open Letter. This brings the
            total number of skeptical German scientists who signed the letter to over 130.]

            http://www.climatedepot.com/2009/08/04/update-consensus-takes-another-hit-more-than-60-german-scientists-dissent-over-global-warming-claims-call-climate-fears-pseudo-religion-urge-chancellor-to-reconsider-views/

            SPECIAL REPORT: More Than 1000 International Scientists Dissent
            Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims – Challenge UN IPCC & Gore ::: The well
            over 1,000 dissenting scientists are almost 20 times the number of UN
            scientists (52) who authored the media-hyped IPCC 2007 Summary for
            Policymakers:

            http://www.climatedepot.com/2010/12/08/special-report-more-than-1000-international-scientists-dissent-over-manmade-global-warming-claims-challenge-un-ipcc-gore-2/

            http://cfact.org/pdf/2010_Senate_Minority_Report.pdf

            Manhattan Declaration on Climate Change

            “Global warming” is not a global crisis

            http://www.climatescienceinternational.org/index.php?Itemid=54

            CLIMATE EXPERTS WHO SIGNED MANHATTAN DECLARATION

            The following 206 Manhattan Declaration endorsers are climate science
            specialists or scientists in closely related fields (this is a subset extracted
            from the other lists):

            http://www.climatescienceinternational.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=66&Itemid=1

            *4000 Scientists sign ‘The Heidelberg Appeal’

            The Heidelberg Appeal was signed by 425 members of the scientific and intellectual
            community skeptical of the claims of the global warming alarmists that warming
            was a scientifically verifiable event. A version of the Heidelberg Appeal was
            published in the June 1, 1992 Wall Street Journal over the signatures of 46
            prominent scientists and other intellectuals. It has subsequently been endorsed
            by some 4,000 scientists, including 72 Nobel Prize winners

            http://heartland.org/sites/default/files/sjmc24e00.pdf

            *105 Scientists sign The Leipzig Declaration on Global Climate
            Change

            http://sovereigntyonline.org/p/clim/leipzig97.htm

            The Cornwall Alliance

            An Evangelical Declaration on Global Warming

            http://www.cornwallalliance.org/2009/05/01/evangelical-declaration-on-global-warming/

            http://www.cornwallalliance.org/2009/05/01/signers-of-an-evangelical-declaration-on-global-warming/

            Alarmists Got it Wrong, Humans Not Responsible for Climate
            Change: CERN

            http://www.ibtimes.com/alarmists-got-it-wrong-humans-not-responsible-climate-change-cern-307636

            *116 Scientists Rebuke Obama as ‘Simply Incorrect’ on Global
            Warming

            http://www.cato.org/special/climatechange/cato_climate.pdf

            Over 100 Prominent Scientists Warn UN Against ‘Futile’ Climate
            Control Efforts

            “Significant new peer-reviewed research has cast even more doubt on the
            hypothesis of dangerous human-caused global warming.”

            http://www.epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=d4b5fd23-802a-23ad-4565-3dce4095c360

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Nice list … useless without their peer-reviewed climate science papers. Which science denier site duped you into copying that BS? You see Happer on your list … he’s never published in climate science and lost big time in Minnesota court that I gave you earlier? You’re one sad pathetic nescient cretin and sure know how to pick losers.

      • Lurch47

        Is Al Gore your buddy?
        BTW: Has anyone seen Al lately???

        • Leftwithrightbrain

          Your fascination with Al Gore (who is not a climate scientist but somehow owns you on the topic) does exactly nothing to address the core physical basis for global warming. The simple fact that CO₂ traps radiant heat close to the planet’s surface, and more CO₂ means more trapped heat.The greenhouse effect was discovered in 1824, well over a century before Al Gore was even born. Do a little research sometime. It’s all a long nearly 200 year con by science started by scientists demonstrating that increased atmospheric CO₂ causes the global temperature to increase. Among them, Joseph Fourier in 1824 and 1827; Eunice Foote 1856; John Tyndall in 1859; Svante Arrhenius in 1896; C.J. Fox in 1909; A. Ångström in 1918; Chamberlain and Fowle in 1916; E.O. Hulburt in 1931; S.G. Callendar in 1937; Professor Gilbert Plass in 1956; Stephen Hawking in 1960; Isaac Asimov in 1968; Carl Sagan in 1972; Wally Broecker in 1975; Richard Feynman and “The Jasons” in 1980; and over 660 science organizations in more than 35 countries without even one successful challenge or dissent or alternate hypothesis or model using the mountain of available consilient evidence.

          • Lurch47

            I have NO fascination with the Fool Gore who didn’t even carry his home state of Tennessee in the 2000 election.Why should I do research when all you leffterd pseudo genisus’s can rant and rave . L00K UP what the climate guy in the UN said about Global warming, if you know how>?<

  • Churyl Minne

    Oh no, that dang Global Climate Change has affected the sun too. Will those pesky humans creating tiny fraction increase of a gas that makes up 0.04% of the earths’ atmosphere never cease? Now they have damaged the sun as well.

  • OneMadAmericanMom

    Gorebull Warming………not so much.

    Wasn’t our planet supposed to explode a few months ago? God really does have a sense of humor.

  • Griefner

    i think this is the Maunder Minimum and if it lasts 3-5 solar cycles, it’s going to get a lot colder.
    Last time we had a 3 solar cycle minimum was 1950-1980.
    In Maryland 179 out of 365 days the total record daily low temperature was recorded between 1950 and 1980; with an additional 12 record lows 2 years on either side of the 1950-1980 span.
    Coincidently, the IPCC and the US Government use thsi same 30 year period for their baseline of average temperatures. Of course it’s hotter now; Time Magazine announced we were entering a new ice age in 1978.

    • Leftwithrightbrain

      Where do you get the information that we’re entering a “Maunder Minimum” and it will get colder? Paleoclimatology shows that Maunder summers didn’t differ from previous years and it wasn’t of global scale and started about 50 years into the LIA.

      • agwscam

        Just like with all articles related to the climate change scam we have one fanatic/idiot on here spamming every comment with their lies and propaganda. Only two possibilities here; he’s a troll paid pennies to spend all day spamming -or- he’s actually so stupid that he thinks he’s fighting to ‘save the planet’. I actually think Leftwithnobrain is one of those laughable pieces of human trash who bought into the whole climate change scam because it gives meaning to his otherwise worthless and insignificant life.

        • Leftwithrightbrain

          It is nescient cretin gainsayers like you who chose to read and find malice intent in my comments rather than the knowledge they contain. Suck my balls I am who I am.

          Q. Why can’t science-deniers understand the difference between science and a scam?A. Because they are uneducated, nescient, science-deniers, of course and are those kids that always lose, and rather than getting better, they just claim everyone else cheats or it’s a conspiracy to fool them.

          • agwscam

            -The really laughable point is that when this idiot types his drivel like that above, think about the fact that he is saying these ridiculous pathetic statements about people like Freeman Dyson and Richard Lindzen – and thousands of other scientists who are accomplished and respected leaders and visionaries in their fields. YOU on the other hand are nobody. A worthless pathetic comment section troll on the internet.-

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Puerile projection is so passé.

          • agwscam

            Notice how the warmist trash fails to counter my point. Nothing but a pathetic anti-science internet narcissist who fell in love with himself because he is ‘fighting to save the world’. No hope for this piece of garbage!

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            More projection. You’re very good at this but I don’t think you should add it to expand that one-liner résumé of yours. It won’t impress anyone but your insecure self.

          • agwscam

            -Imagine this piece of anti-science internet trash calling Freeman Dyson and Richard Lindzen and the thousands of other scientists who have debunked the climate change scam ‘ignorant’! Seems like every one of these climate change dolts has the same superman complex with a healthy dose of narcissism throw in the make them truly repulsive!!!

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            If there’s not any published research that states exactly what you’re claiming, climate change debunked as a scam, then there are two possibilities. (a) No one has shown this in the research, and there’s an opportunity to publish an important paper, or (b) no one else working in the field agrees with your conclusions.

          • agwscam

            There is plenty of scientific research that has debunked every single aspect of the climate change scam. It’s just that the dangerous fanatics and criminals worshiping this new climate change religion refuse to read anything that contradicts (blasphemy) their beliefs.

            1350+ Peer-Reviewed Papers Supporting Skeptic Arguments Against ACC/AGW Alarmism
            http://www.populartechnology.net/2009/10/peer-reviewed-papers-supporting.html

            Before accepting any criticisms of this list, please read the detailed rebuttals.
            ~
            Criticism: The list has been debunked, discredited or refuted.

            Rebuttal: The list has never been debunked, discredited or refuted, as all known criticisms of this list have been rebutted or a change made to correct the issue. The existence of a criticism does not make it true, as invalid criticisms of the list have been repeatedly shown to be based on lies, misinformation or strawman arguments. In most cases these long rebutted criticisms are now years old and have no relation to the current version of the list. Changes include; clarifications and corrections made to the list when necessary. All corrections made have been insignificant and have never affected the list count.

            Criticism: The list has not been peer-reviewed.

            Rebuttal: The list is a resource not a scholarly paper. Bibliographic resources are not peer-reviewed but curated by an editor. They are used as aids in locating information, in this case peer-reviewed papers supporting skeptic arguments.

            Criticism: The list has been cherry picked.

            Rebuttal: This is absolutely false, as the list does not discriminate between competing skeptical viewpoints and the purpose of the list is clearly stated, “To provide a resource for peer-reviewed papers that support skeptic arguments against ACC/AGW or Alarmism and to prove that these papers exist contrary to claims otherwise.” Using this logic the IPCC reports are “cherry picked” because they failed to included most of these papers.

            Criticism: The list does not present a scientific argument.

            Rebuttal: The list is a resource not a scientific argument. The purpose of the list is to show that peer-reviewed papers exist that support skeptic arguments and to be used as a resource to locate these papers.

            Criticism: 97% of the climate science literature disagrees with the list.

            Rebuttal: No 97% study exists that shows 43,950 peer-reviewed papers explicitly endorsing AGW. The largest study to date, Cook et al. (2013) attempted to categorize 11,944 abstracts (not entire papers) to their level of endorsement of AGW and found 7930 papers (66%) held no position. While only 65 papers (0.5%) explicitly endorsed and quantified AGW as +50% (Humans are the primary cause). Their methodology was so fatally flawed that they falsely classified skeptic papers as endorsing AGW, apparently believing to know more about the papers than their authors. Cook et al.’s author self-ratings simply confirmed the worthlessness of their methodology, as they were not representative of the sample since only 4% of the authors (1189 of 29,083) rated their own papers and of these 63% disagreed with their abstract ratings. All the other “97% consensus” studies: Doran & Zimmerman (2009), Anderegg et al. (2010) and Oreskes (2004) have been refuted by peer-review.

            Criticism: All climate related papers not on the list endorse AGW.

            Rebuttal: While there are thousands of climate related papers, only a small percentage of these even mention “Anthropogenic Global Warming”.

            Criticism: Every major scientific organization disagrees with the list.

            Rebuttal: Policy statements release by a handful of council members or signed by just the president of a scientific organization can speak for no one other than these few scientists. It is disingenuous to imply that the membership bodies (hundreds of thousands of members) of these scientific organizations (which never voted to approve such statements) can be used in support of these statements. Many members join scientific organizations for free access to organizational resources or discounts on journals and meetings. They may have little to no interest in the organization’s policy positions. Without a comprehensive survey or poll of every member’s position in relation to the organization’s policy statements no meaningful conclusions can be drawn.

            Criticism: Some papers on the list have been debunked, discredited or refuted.

            Rebuttal: The existence of a criticism does not make it true. Rebuttals to published peer-reviewed criticisms of a paper are included on the list as supplemental papers following the original. These rebuttals either completely refute the original criticism or correct for legitimate errors and show that these do not affect their original conclusions. It is not reasonable to expect these authors to waste their time responding to every alarmist blog post or comment made against their paper(s) on the Internet. Yet, according to AGW proponents peer-reviewed papers that do not agree with their alarmist position on climate change are either wrong or do not exist. This resource was created to correct this myth.

            ….continued below…

            http://www.populartechnology.net/2009/10/peer-reviewed-papers-supporting.html#Rebuttals

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            The poptech list is by now a very old, tired joke. You were duped again! Many of the authors indignantly wrote to the compiler to complain that their work was being grossly misrepresented. Many of the publications on the list are non peer reviewed nonsense. Most tellingly, not a single paper on the list offers any argument against the consensus that has not since been thoroughly discredited. That’s why it’s a consensus. Nine of the ten most cited authors on the list have links to ExonMobil-funded organizations. The tenth has co-authored several papers with Exxon-funded contributors. When you really crunch the numbers, all you really find is a small echochamber of the same individuals who pop up on every denier list and petition around. Another red flag is not one of the journals is a prestigious academic journal in it’s field. And finally your argument fails on the fallacies of reductio ad absurdum and argumentum ad numerum. Long lists might look convincing, but they’re no substitute for research that is free of fossil fuel industry bias and is taken seriously by the scientific community. BTW: there is no such science as ACC, the rebuttals are BS and none debunk every single aspect of the climate change scam!

          • agwscam

            Simple minds like yours are so easy to predict, which is why I included the rebuttals to your laughable arguments right along with the Poptech list. You are a liar, a fool and clearly a budding sociopath! I’ve been dealing with you pieces of human trash long enough to know that none of you have any ethics and quite a few of you are actually sociopaths who believe that any conduct or action is justified when you are fighting to “save the planet”.

            “…Sociopaths are masters are presenting themselves as heroes with high morals and philosophy, yet underneath it they are the true criminal minds in society who steal, undermine, deceive, and often incite emotional chaos among entire communities. They are masters at turning one group of people against another group while proclaiming themselves to be the one true savior. Wherever they go, they create strife, argument and hatred, yet they utterly fail to see their own role in creating it. They are delusional at so many levels that their brains defy logical reasoning.

            You cannot reason with a sociopath. Attempting to do so only wastes your time and annoys the sociopath…”

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            I care not a jot that you write what you spew. I only post to deny your ignorance for others. Suck my balls I am who I am. You’re either delusional or a liar. Pick one. Then seek professional help to find a cure or palliative treatment. Thanks for sharing that despite having one of the best free education systems in the world we still manage to turn out nescient cretins like you.

          • agwscam
          • agwscam
          • Randy Rogers

            Spot on

          • agwscam
          • agwscam
  • Gee whiz, does that mean that GLOBAL WARMING isn’t gonna happen, on-cue like the lefties insist?!

    Don’t tell AlGore; he’s still recovering at the Funny Farm and this bad new would just set him off again, into one of his mindless, rants ‘n raves.

    Of course, Hilly could use some of Al’s antics on stage . . . would liven up her brain-dead, dummy-prompter reading sessions.

  • 19238hmh

    I kept looking for information on the actual effect this period of calm has on earth and its inhabitants. What does it mean for us in our daily lives? I have no idea.

  • OWilson

    Lokking forward to a “Democrat Minimum” in November, 2016

  • Ron Bartels

    The sun is wearing out.

    That the sun will go completely dark has been promised in scripture. That when it relights it will even hotter for a while is promised in scripture. That God has promised a New Heaven and a New Earth is promised in God’s Word. The Creator of all that is is in control of all that is. It would do no good to escape to Mars when the sun wears out. It is the same sun that lights and warms earth.

    Revelation 21:1 – “And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.”

    Psalms 115:3 – But our God [is] in the heavens: he hath done whatsoever he hath pleased.

    Isaiah 45:7 – I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these [things].

    1 Chronicles 29:11 – Thine, O LORD, [is] the greatness, and the power, and the glory, and the victory, and the majesty: for all [that is] in the heaven and in the earth [is thine]; thine [is] the kingdom, O LORD, and thou art exalted as head above all.

    Isaiah 45:6 – That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that [there is] none beside me. I [am] the LORD, and [there is] none else.

    For humans who decide to be part of God’s Family by being born again, he will rescue you and give you a new body not subject to death, for death will be wiped away.

    1 Corinthians 10:13 – There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God [is] faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear [it].

    Revelation 21:4 – “And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.”

  • Nov-cubed

    Interesting on how the sun mitigates cosmic rays.

    • BraveNewWhirled

      Not too unlike a the Sun building a wall to keep out invaders.

  • Carabec

    Interesting.

  • Chris Appleby

    Hmmm, looks like 1876, 1878, an 1879; and 1911, 1912, and 1913 are all on the same chart. How does 2007, 2008, and 2009 differ from those other sets of years so close together?!?

  • Lou Disalvo

    One comment relating to the topic. What a surprise and what a bunch of morons posting.

    • A-O

      Lou, you read all of these comments? Wow I stand in awe of your perseverance and attention to detail.

    • Randy Rogers

      Get a grip friendo

  • steve b

    THE SUN IS OBVIOUSLY BEING CHANGED BY MAN-MADE GLOBAL WARMING AND PEOPLE DRIVING THEIR SUVs ON THE SUN. IF OBAMA HAS HIS WAY, THE SUN WILL STOP ITS NUCLEAR GENERATION OF HEAT AND BUILD WIND FARMS.

    • Randy Rogers

      Solar wind farms

  • A-O

    The answer is obvious: global warming. The answer is obvious: cow emissions. The answer is obvious: Donald Trump. The answer is obvious: we don’t know why the hell it does what it does, when it does, it just does.

  • ussjimmycarter

    Man like did this! Totally! Let’s all ride a bike, comrade!

  • slobotnavich

    There was science fiction novel some years (decades?) back about the sun reaching the end of its life, which will go out with a super-nova, ending all life on our planet and reducing the earth to a charred cinder. We’re doomed, DOOMED!

    • Randy Rogers

      Not enough mass for that. Just a regular nova. Bad for us carbon polluters though.

      • slobotnavich

        I bow to your superior knowledge on this topic – thanks for the info.

      • slobotnavich

        Well, thank God for that, Randy. I’ll be able to sleep tonight!

  • Sun Tzu

    I think it is a disgrace that Algore’s Chicken Little’s warnings are disregarded! After all, look what happened in Florida…OK, look what happened to the Antarctic ice cap…well, it’s likely that Conservatives are taking all of this out of context. Let’s be patient, SOMETHING Algore might come true! The world waits…

  • The Talking Head

    Under consequences of a solar minimum they fail to mention a cooing climate. Conversely, during periods of high sun activity, repetitive strong solar cycles, as were experienced for a century prior to the recent less active cycles, the climate would have warmed. This solar variability and its impact to the climate must be removed, along with other variables, such as ocean cycles, which have a strong effect on warming and cooling, as do volcanic aerosols, where extended episodes of clear atmosphere can have a significant warming effect just as surely as high levels of volcanic ash cools the climate, these non-Carbon climate drivers are not insignificant, and must be accounted for if we are to isolate the climate impact of CO2 alone. The reality is these non-Carbon climate variables are not modeled and warming that has occurred during the past decades is attributed solely to CO2 increase. This is simply not true.

  • MidwestNorsk

    Global Cooling to follow.

    Throw another load of coal on the fire.

  • john martin

    Clearly a case of man made global sun spot inactivity. We must quickly get off of carbon based energy to start the sun back up or we’ll all die a terrible death.

  • Robert Wagner

    The suns output doesn’t have a perfect correlation with surface temperatures. It isn’t how much radiation the sun puts out, it is how much radiation reaches the earth, especially the oceans that matters. A hot sun and extreme cloud cover or a volcano could result in a cooling earth, much like pulling the shade can cool a room on a hot summer day.

    • Leftwithrightbrain

      There is an error in your posit. You can’t have extreme cloud cover and cooling and particulate in the atmosphere simultaneously … that’s not possible scientifically.

      • Robert Wagner

        Says who? Just look up year w/o a summer, Mt Tamboura? Cosmic rays are also thought to seed clouds.

        • Leftwithrightbrain

          So did the year w/o summer have extreme cloud cover? Particulate causes moisture to condense out of the atmosphere. When temperatures fall there is less WV and it’s a very short residency and condensing GHG. Less WV means less clouds. Physics works against your posit.

  • Rick D

    The thought that the white American middle class is going to pay that sorry communist community chain smoking bolshavick baboon 400,000 a year in retirement for wrecking the industrial economy in Ohio river valley make my ass hurt. This globalist shill has destroyed the coal and rail industry . Let the Chinese gut our steel industry , while that monkey faced Queen of Sheba has troll the planet rubbing here ape ass all over 5star hotels ? They will have shovel the DIPPIDY DOO out the White House , what a screwed up mess.

  • Daniel Staggers

    “And there will be signs in the heavens.”

    • Yes prophesy is great for edification. We all know where fear originates.

  • greatpyr

    It’s all those damn SUVs driving around on the Sun. Hillary will fix it – she just needs to add about $10 Trillion in taxes to do it. (Oops. Forgot to take my sarcasm pills today. Nurse!)

  • Pepperspray137

    With the effect CO2 has on farming one would almost think global warming was designed to make sure Earth could sustain a continuously growing population? Naw, none of that metaphysical foil hat wearing.

    • Leftwithrightbrain

      What is this secret information that you have about the effect of farming? I can’t find that in the peer-reviewed science.

      • Pepperspray137

        Let me educate you real quick, plants require CO2 in order to survive. If the level of CO2 is too low plants will die. If this level is raised it will cause the plants to grow faster, allowing for more harvests per season. I know millennial socialists have a tough time understanding science that is not directly related to sociology, but you can trust me, CO2 makes plants grow.

        • Leftwithrightbrain

          I understand your first two sentences. But the rest of your comment is pure junk science and fabrication, so I can’t trust you. If you want me to trust you … you will have to point to the peer-reviewed science that supports your assertions. Please proceed …

          • Pepperspray137

            Lol, whatever you say kiddo <3
            You just go sit in your echo chamber and feel safe while the world spins around you.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            I’ll take that as your admission and concession that you cannot point to the peer-reviewed science to support your fabrications.

          • Pepperspray137

            A concession that CO2 does not affect plants? you’re an idiot. I feel bad for you, a mentally weak person who thinks he’s smart….

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            You have conceded by default by not providing the evidence to support your false assertions. So until you can muster up the courage to do so … you’re conceded that you’re wrong. There’s a plethora of published science on the topic so I am very suspicious why you are shying away.

  • TruckinMack

    I realize by now most people know that Global Warming is a myth, (which this article helps explain). I cannot wait until everyone realizes its idiot cousin, Climate Change, is also a myth – though in a different way.

    Man Made Global Warming is like 7 Up, ‘Never had it, never will.’ Climate Change is ‘Always had it, Always will.’ It is a natural phenomena that has been occurring ever since we have had a climate that could change. Climate Change is constant. The climate changes every second of every day. Needless to say, this is not man’s fault.

    • Leftwithrightbrain

      Q. Why can’t science-deniers understand the difference between science and myth?A. Because they are uneducated nescient science-deniers, of course and it doesn’t push their prejudiced and non-scientific narrative devoid of evidence that requires belief.

      BTW: the climate doesn’t change every second of every day … that’s weather and you learned the difference in grade 3 if you were educated in the USA.

      • agwscam

        —The really laughable point is that when this idiot types his drivel
        like that above, think about the fact that he is saying these
        ridiculous pathetic statements about people like Freeman Dyson and
        Richard Lindzen – and thousands of other scientists who are accomplished
        and respected leaders and visionaries in their fields. YOU on the other
        hand are nobody. A worthless pathetic comment section troll on the
        internet.—

        • Leftwithrightbrain

          Lindzen the disgraced fossil fuel shill?

          • agwscam

            Only disgraced to cult members like you who slander anybody who disagrees with your anti-science beliefs. Richard Lindzen is more respected and accomplished that you ever will be – and you just hate that don’t you!!!

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            So why did he resign his emeritus professorship … an almost unheard of action in the halls of academia unless gross fraud or negligence or felony?

          • agwscam

            I suspect that since academia is addicted to government research grants that Richard Lindzen’s role in debunking the climate change scam was viewed as incompatible with the strategy of getting more taxpayer $$$ to try and prop up the collapsing climate change scam. Either he left because his ethics would not allow him to participate in the scheme or they came to a mutual agreement to allow him to leave under a restrictive confidentiality clause.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            He resigned to prevent being fired. The faculty and his peers spoke loudly and clearly. He left a long career like a rabid dog with it’s tail between its legs and slunk off in shame. Almost as big a disgrace when he lost so badly in Court in April this year. And this is your hero.

        • Randy Rogers

          That really puts things into perspective

      • TruckinMack

        Is the weather part of the climate? Yes, of course it is. Does the weather change every second of every day? Yes of course it does. Does the earth as a whole go through periods of warm, cold, rain, drought, wind, calm, you name it? Yes, of course it does. Do plants (or animals, for that matter) effect the climate? Yes, of course they do, yet plants are constantly morphing into new plants, creating new ecologies.

        To repeat to the the science-propagandists, the Climate changes every second of every day. This, of course, means that it is not man’s fault. To say otherwise does not make you a science denier, it makes you a science liar.

        • Leftwithrightbrain

          Is the weather part of the climate? False. You may want to use that Google search tool before you keep making grade 3 science errors.

          • TruckinMack

            Science liars will do or say anything, no matter how stupid, but still, keep it up. Using invective to try to prove your point doesn’t help. (But it will make all your friends think you are super cool and you will get more likes on FB, so please, please, continue.)

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Weather is not climate and vice versa. Sorry cupcake you were taught that from the 3rd grade onwards if you went to school in the USA. You have broadband … stop letting Team Denial down with stupid and dumb comments that are so easily refuted. At least try and put more effort in and conjure up BS that is a challenge.

          • TruckinMack

            I realize reading and comprehension is difficult, but please show me where I said Weather is Climate, or vice versa?

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Is the weather part of the climate? Yes, of course it is. The climate changes every second of every day/weather change every second of every day

          • TruckinMack

            Correct, weather is part of the climate.

            To repeat from a recent post, ‘Climate: the composite or generally prevailing weather conditions of a region…’

            Really, you should just delete all of your posts on this. You are embarrassing yourself and all of your Leftist kin.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            weather is part of the climate False. Weather will give you a 1:100 or 1,000 year storm climate can’t tell you anything about that. Climate changes slowly over decades … weather can go from storm to clear in minutes. Climate can only give the average of all physical properties whereas weather gives the actual. Climate can’t tell you the temperature in NYC next year but it can tell you the mean.

          • TruckinMack

            Why am I arguing with this idiot? He is a far Left troll who fancies himself intelligent. I notice that he does not get many likes, probably because the things he says are so stupid. Maybe if I like his post he will go away and bother someone else… Hope springs eternal.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            The idiot is the one who says science is a myth and that wasn’t me. Or that climate and weather are the same. Or the one who denies reality and says global warming is a myth when we spend billions of dollars on satellites and other technology that tells us a different story to what you sprout. Only an idiot could write “Do plants (or animals, for that matter) effect the climate? Yes, of course they do” When only one animal (humans) are impacting climate and no others or plants are involved in changing the climate. Extant adapts to climate not vice versa. Your knowledge of science is worse than pitiful. Did you even graduate middle school or are you just another red state idiot running your mouth?

          • TruckinMack

            Science is a myth? Is the half-wit now a half squared wit, or is that even too complimentary? Dear Half Squared Wit. I ‘liked’ your post, but that is all I am going to do. You got one like.

            On the other hand, you are a warning beacon to all. Do not drink the Leftish Kool-aid, else you too will face brain rot. I withdraw my request. Dear Left without a brain, please keep posting me. You are a gift that keeps on giving.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Science has no ideology. What bothers me more about the real morons who feed you this tripe is that we are launching ourselves into a new planet equilibrium that is unfriendly to our (human) and most of extant existence.

          • TruckinMack

            Global Warming didn’t work. Climate Change is proving to be a bust. Now it’s a ‘new equilibrium’.

            That is going to fail as well because, like Climate Change which is constant, everyday finds us in a ‘new equilibrium’. It will also fail because it sounds even more vacuous than Climate Change.

            Yet, again, please, please continue. It is one of the funnier things I’ve heard Earth Mothers say. I can see it now, Chicken Littles running around crying, ‘The Equilibrium is falling! The Equilibrium is falling!’

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            God, not this ancient trope again. It was Frank Luntz, the Republican pollster, who advocated calling it “climate change” because it seemed less threatening. And the climate has indeed been changing over time, but not over the last few thousands of years, and never near as fast. And while CO₂ may have been a following indicator in the past, it is the leading cause at this time, as has been understood by atmospheric physicists for decades.

          • TruckinMack

            No, we never called it Climate Change. We still call it Global Warming. Or is it New Equilibrium? You are awesome. Your complete denial of history is as self defeating as your denial of the definition of climate, as your belief that using invective helps your argument. We know because CO2 is an indicator of it. (It being Climate Change? Global Warming? A falling Equilibrium?)

            PS: Wrong. You went to Climate Change when the sun quieted and Global Warming stopped. You needed to call it something else. Something to strike terror in the hearts and minds of unthinking Liberals everywhere.

            This is fun.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Take it up with Frank Luntz cupcake. Science has always referred to global warming and cooling as those natural cycles have been known for over 200 years. Everyone now knows CC implies the current unprecedented and unnatural warming.

          • TruckinMack

            Everyone know Global Warming is a fantasy cooked up by Liberals to scare other Liberals into voting to give Liberals more power and money. Ditto of Climate Change. Ditto for Black Lives Matter and Code Pink. Emotionally unstable Liberals scaring other emotionally unstable Liberals.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Morons know that if you add external CO₂ to the atmosphere it causes the surface of the Earth to warm. Are you suggesting that you’re not smarter than a moron?

          • TruckinMack

            As you seem an expert on being a moron, I shall defer to your expertise.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Projection of personal fault is puerile.

          • TruckinMack

            Seriously? You start going on about what morons do and don’t know and then you want to deny such knowledge. I accept that you are less than a half squared wit, but apparently you also have dementia. Liberals around Disqus are crying in their light beer tonight reading your posts.

          • TruckinMack

            Let me help with a definition of Climate from Dictionary.com: “the composite or generally prevailing weather conditions of a region, as temperature, air pressure, humidity, precipitation, sunshine, cloudiness, and winds, throughout the year, averaged over a series of years.”

            http://www.dictionary.com/browse/climate

            Feel the burn. I hope it sustains you.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            The definition counters everything you have been writing and confirms what I pointed out. The salient part is ” averaged over a series of years.” Now if you had gone to science for your definition you would have found it explained that it was the mean pattern over 30 years. Climate projects, weather predicts. Climate is that straight line you see on temperature, rainfall, etc graphs. Weather is the noise that you see on either of the straight line. Weather is what you experience. Climate is the pattern.

          • Randy Rogers

            There continued employment depends on sustaining the scam.

  • agwscam

    ~~~

    “My life as a climate lukewarmer”

    http://bit.ly/1DcP7Nd

    ~~~

    “Critical Thinking on Climate Change”

    http://1.usa.gov/1PqAEWo

    ~~~

    “The origins of the corruption of science: Climate Science: Is it
    currently designed to answer questions?”

    http://bit.ly/1GFzC1y

    ~~~

    “The Fanaticism of the Apocalypse: Save the Earth, Punish Human
    Beings”

    http://amzn.to/1OuUY9U

    ~~~

    “Tell me why”

    http://bit.ly/1k14BjX

    ~~~

    “Global Warming ‘Fabricated’ by NASA and NOAA”

    http://bit.ly/1pDQkbx

    ~~~

    “Massive Alteration Of NASA Temperature Data Since 1999”

    http://bit.ly/1OuV0hQ

    ~~~

    “The fiddling with temperature data is the biggest science scandal
    ever”

    http://bit.ly/1EPYB5d

    ~~~

    “NASA Data Tampering Has Destroyed The Global Temperature Record”

    http://bit.ly/1NDSBBs

    ~~~

    “1350+ Peer-Reviewed Papers Supporting Skeptic Arguments Against ACC/AGW
    Alarmism” http://bit.ly/1ghTKuv

    ~~~

    “The Great American Bubble Machine” (BUBBLE #6 Global Warming):

    http://rol.st/1aFG9Pu

    ~~~

    “Chain of Environmental Command: How a Club of Billionaires and Their
    Foundations Control the Environmental Movement and Obama’s EPA”

    http://1.usa.gov/1LimNwc

    ~~~

    “United Nations Admits Climate Change Is About Undoing Capitalism”

    http://bit.ly/1L92h3h

    ~~~

    “We should all want to be wise and careful stewards of the beautiful
    planet we call home. But…”

    http://green-agenda.com/

    • Randy Rogers

      Yes it is. Agenda 21

  • why would people use a scientific article to bring politics in to it? Like Obama has control of sun spots!

    • Ray Arlen

      Like humans have control of the planet’s climate! Absurd, isn’t it?

  • TrinityKiller

    You know that it is written in Scripture that we would see signs in the heavens that the return of the Lord would be imminent. Perhaps the lack of sunspots is one of these signs?

    • Leftwithrightbrain

      Fairy tales have meaning?

      • agwscam

        Only four types of people are still pushing this collapsing climate change scam; liars, thieves, fanatics and the ignorant (vast majority). The liars crave power and drastic societal/economic change, the thieves seek wealth, the fanatics have fallen for another “the end of the world as we know it” scam and live in a fantasy world where they are heroes fighting to save the planet, and the ignorant are mostly just misguided and misinformed average citizens who think they are being environmentally responsible by believing in this horrific and destructive criminal scam.

        • Leftwithrightbrain

          Off-topic as usual.

          • agwscam

            Butt-hurt sociopath…as usual.

            You should go back to HuffMyPost and ThinkNothing.org where they think you’re smart!!!

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Projection of personal fault is puerile.

  • Darin

    An article about solar activity = lots of childish anti-Clinton comments??? OH…..Drudge!

    • TrinityKiller

      The Clintons are the perfect foil for jokes about solar inactivity. Maybe she sold the sunspots for cash money?

  • Rawdawg

    Shut up Neegro, vote for Hillary and watch ISIS take over, that B wants to bring 500,000 more of those dirty Muslims into the country. Everyone gets all upset when terrorists attack, but everyone ignores this fact when supporting that B and we’ll likely be fighting them with our hands, cause you know that B going for the guns snd our freedoms. But go on ahead, follow the trend and be stupid.

  • thunderbolt007

    What is the effect on weather &/or global warming/cooling?

    • cjm

      Impossible to tell since Obama classified archived NWS data claiming national security.

      • Randy Rogers

        He can’t allow those pesky facts to get out, now can he?

      • thunderbolt007

        That is curious? Why is NWS data classified?

        • cjm

          For our own good, now go to sleep children. It is because climate agenda 21 is a massive fraud.

        • cjm

          The department of energy, under the guidance of Nurmberg educated physicist dr. Ernest Moniz, has made it quite clear that agenda 2030 will be implemented.

        • cjm

          I would assume a physicist like dr Ernest Moniz would know that ” global dimming” is an endothermic event, it traps heat. I also suspect the good doctor is aware that metal aerosols injected into the atmosphere cause stratification and reduce natural rainfall.

  • Angelicus1

    We must be headed for an ICE AGE. (Global Warming religious nuts… you are so wrong!)

  • Yukiko

    Global warming on earth is causing this. I just read the report from Chicken Little.

  • Jimmy Crackorn

    petty insignificant humans…..The SUN is your climate……”whose your Daddy”

  • agwscam
  • agwscam
  • BraveNewWhirled

    That’s interesting about the lower sunspot activity being responsible for a cooling atmosphere, in turn making it easier for satellites to stay up. That means it will take less fuel to get and keep Hillary in orbit. I’m all for saving gas whenever I can.

  • El Fritz

    I’m a racist! Unconsciously, if not consciously, we are all racists. We live in a racist culture. The goofy ones are those who don’t get this yet.

    • Randy Rogers

      There’s only one race friend, human.

  • klaffner

    Maybe its our green house gases that are saving us from an impending ice age.

    • Leftwithrightbrain

      We are in an ice-age.

      • klaffner

        I thought we were continuing to come out the so-called ‘little ice age.’

        • Leftwithrightbrain

          We are in an interglacial period and came out the glacial period about 20 ka ago.

          • klaffner

            20 ka?? what is ka?

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            20,000 years.

          • klaffner

            Of course. Seems like you are not aware of the little ice age. That ended about 200 years ago.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            LIA was neither global nor geosynchronous.

          • klaffner

            So what? It still happened.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Gross ignorance on steroids.

          • klaffner

            The LIA, as you call it, did occur. Like real ice ages (and like the warming since the end of the LIA) it was due to the Sun’s general emission of warming energy. What ignorance are you referring to?

            I was making a small joke that maybe man made greenhouse gases might end up saving the planet by holding in heat as the Sun heads into another low energy phase. I say small joke because it may be correct.

  • Jaguar47

    Bush did it?!

  • El Fritz

    I’m loving this. It’s like somebody picked up the rock that all of the people that watch Fox and listen to Rush lived under. They’ve all come running out and are following the Dear Leader. This is actually quite a bit of fun.

    • DontGruberMe

      Hail Obama !

      for he means well (we have complete insight of that) and he has the okay skin color

    • SFCGator

      What the hael are you talking about? More left wing liberal nonsense.

    • Randy Rogers

      Dear leader is Obama. Enjoy your delusions.

  • Justin

    Wtf are you people talking about? This is an article about the sun and in a half a dozen comments it became about political bs that is irrelevant. Take the political view to your respected forums who give a rats ass. Keep science science.

    • Randy Rogers

      Obama is the winer pushing the global warming scam as recently as yesterday. It’s the Sun that’s effecting the temperature. We’re likely heading into a mini ice age (Maunder minimum).

      • Justin

        Jesus H…. your reading comprehension…. I’m so sorry

        • Randy Rogers

          Do you actually know anything about solar cycles?

          • Justin

            I know enough about them to know that Obama or any other being, as far as we know, can physically manipulate the atmosphere of an entire planet, or solar system for that matter, in the span of 8 years. Shit humans have been trying it for a hundred plus, I.e. industrial revolution and beyond, and we’ve raised the global temp a few degrees. A few critical degrees, but a few non the less. So do I know solar cycles? No. But i know, from actual scientist, that global warming is MOSTLY caused by humans. Not an agenda. Again, now upgraded, #keepsciencescience

          • Justin

            Edit, changed can to can’t. (Line 3, word 2.) Apologize for the confusion.

      • Leftwithrightbrain

        We are in an ice-age and your Maunder information is spurious at best especially as it started 50 years after the LIA cycle started.

    • SFCGator

      Exactly! Science, true science shows that AGWCC is a totally political driven agenda, not science.

      • Leftwithrightbrain

        Your second sentence is a non sequitur compounded by a straw man as there is no such science as AGWCC.

  • Lesthanzero

    To say that the sun is “quiet,” are scientists observing the complete circumference of it? The photos appear to be showing only the hemisphere facing earth. Or is that the only side that matters in this phenomenon?

    • Randy Rogers

      Yes they see the entire circumference in all wavelengths with various solar satellites.

  • Rockimsockim

    Funny how nature smacks liberals down when it continues to do what it will and ignore their rants. Put some spots on the sun folks and I will bow down to your power to control the climate. This is a very heavily studied cycle that Gore and the troglodytes have never acknowledged. Deep breaths and center yourselves, it will all be OK or it won’t but please keep the volume down on the senseless bleating.

    • Leftwithrightbrain

      Science has no ideology. What bothers me more about the real morons who feed you this tripe, is that we are launching ourselves into a new planet equilibrium that is unfriendly to our (human) and most of extant existence.

      • Stan

        Warmer is better, btw.

        • Leftwithrightbrain

          False. Current extant did not evolve in warmer and you have no published science showing your prejudiced opinion is valid. Most current research is showing that it will be long term negative.

          • Stan

            Actually I do,
            Bjorn Lomberg did the math for you.
            Warmer is better, read the book Cool It.
            Fewer people die from heat events than from cold events, agriculture does better when it is warmer, and there are fewer violent weather events.
            Try reality, your fake little social justice warrior world is making you look like a fool.

            The Medieval Warm Period was a time of great advancement.
            Oh, wait, you guys wrote that out of the record….

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Why do you never have any science to back your vacuity? Because it is pure unadulterated BS! Perhaps someone in conversation should try responding and staying on topic instead of constant puerile and overt deflection and obfuscation or start a new thread. BTW: The MCA was neither global nor geosynchronous so when you view the global data it disappears from the record or maybe you believe the planet only has one hemisphere.

          • Stan

            Read a book.
            Cool It by Bjorn Lomberg details how warmer is better.
            And he’s a global warming believer…

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            A book is not peer reviewed science an is just someone’s opinion. Lomberg doesn’t have a sterling climate science track record because he lacks two major components … no education in climate science and a lousy track record based on fluff.

          • Stan

            More people die from cold weather events than from warm weather events.
            It’s as simple as that.

            As for peer review, Mann’s bogus hockey stick was peer reviewed, and wrong.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            More people die from cold weather events than from warm weather events

            You’re either delusional or a liar. Pick one. Most of the world’s population is centered just north of the equator and as published science and data show …. warm events kill orders of magnitude more people than anywhere else on the planet.

            Mann’s bogus hockey stick was peer reviewed, and wrong

            Published science again disagrees with you. Confirmation of the hockey stick (through 2013):
            1. 1998: K. R. Briffa, et al., Influence of volcanic eruptions on Northern Hemisphere summer temperature over the past 600 years, Nature, 393, 450-455, 4 June 1998
            2. 2000: T. J. Crowley, Causes of Climate Change over the Past 1000 Years, Science, 289, 270
            3. 2000: S. Huang, H. N. Pollack, P. Y. Shen, Temperature trends over the past five centuries reconstructed from borehole temperatures, Nature Letts., 403, 756-758
            4. 2002: C. Bertrand, et al., Climate of the last millennium: a sensitivity study, Tellus, 54,3,2210244, May
            5. 2002: J. Esper, Cook, Schweingruber, Low-Frequency Signals in Long Tree-Ring Chronologies for Reconstructing Past Temperature Variability, Science, 295, 5563, pp.2250-2253, Mar. 22, 2002
            6. T. M. Cronin et al., MWP, LIA, and 20th century temperature variability from Chesapeake Bay, Global Planetary Change, 36, 2003, 17-29
            7. 2004: H. N. Pollack, J. E. Smerdon, Borehole climate reconstructions: Spatial structure and hemispheric averages, J. Geophys. Res., 109, D11106, 9pp, 2004
            8. 2005: E. Jansen, et al., “Extracting a Climate Signal from 169 Glacier Records”, Science, 308,5722,675-677, Apr
            9. 2005: A. Moberg et al. Northern Hemisphere 2,000 year Temperature Reconstruction using low and high-res proxy data
            10. 2005: S. Rutherford, et al., “Proxy-Based Northern Hemisphere Temperature Reconstructions”, J.Clim,18, 2308-2329,2005
            11. 2005: R. Wilson, et al., “Highly variable Northern Hemisphere temperatures reconstructed from low/high-resolution proxy data”, Nature,433,7026,613-617,Feb2005
            12. 2006: R. D’Arrigo, et al., On the long-term context for late twentieth century warming”. J.Geophys.Res.,111(D3)
            13. 2006: T. J. Osborn, K.R. Briffa, “The Spatial Extent of 20th-Century Warmth in the Context of the Past 1200 Years”.Science311(5762):841-844,2006
            14. 2007: A. Moberg, et al., Ch 6: Palaeoclimate, IPCC 4th Assessment Report, 2007
            15. 2007: R. Wilson, et al., “A matter of divergence:Tracking recent warming at hemispheric scales using tree ring data”, J.Geophys.Res.,112,D17103,Sept2007
            16. 2007: J. Jouzel, et al., “Orbital and Millennial Antarctic Climate Variability over the Past 800,000 Years”, Science, 317,5839,793-797,Aug2007.
            17. 2007: M. Ammann and E. Wahl, Climatic Change, 85, 1-2 , 71-88
            18. 2007: M. N. Juckes, Millennial temperature reconstruction intercomparison and evaluation, Clim. Past, 3, 591-609, 2007
            19. 2007: Wilson et al. N. Hemisphere Tree-Ring-Based Temperature Reconstruction 1750-2005, J. Geophys. Res., 112, D17103, 11 Sept.
            20. 2007: E. R. Wahl, C. M. Ammann, Robustness of the Mann, Bradley, Hughes reconstruction of Northern Hemisphere surface temperatures: Examination of criticisms based on the nature and processing of proxy climate evidence, Climatic Change, 85:33-69, 2007
            21. 2008: A. Moberg, R. Mohammad, T. Mauritsen, Analysis of the Moberg et al. (2005)hemispheric temperature reconstruction, Clim. Dyn. 31, 7-8, 957-971, Dec. 2008
            22. 2009: D. S. Kaufman, et al., Recent Warming Reverses Long-Term Arctic Cooling, Science, 325, 1236 (2009)
            23. 2009: H. von Storch, Zorita, Gonzalez-Rouco, Assessment of three Temperature Reconstruction Methods in the Virtual Reality of a Climate Simulation, Int. J. Earth Sci. , 98, 1, 2009
            24/25. 2010: M.P. Tingley, P. Huybers, “A Bayesian Algorithm for Reconstructing Climate Anomalies in Space and Time. Part I: Development and Applications to Paleoclimate Reconstruction Problems”; Part II: Comparison with the Regularized Expectation-Maximization Algorithm”. J.Clim.23 (10):2759-2800,2010
            26. 2010: D. Frank, et al., A noodle, hockey stick, and spaghetti plate: a perspective on high-resolution paleoclimatology, WIREs, Climate Change, 1, 4, 507-516, July/Aug. 2010
            27. 2011: J. Martin-Chivelet, et al., Land surface temperature changes in Northern Iberia since 4000yrBP, based on δ13C of speleothems, Global and Planetary Change, 77,1-2, pp 1-12, 2011
            28. 2011: R. F. Spielhagen, et al., Enhanced Modern Heat Transfer to the Arctic by Warm Atlantic Water, Science, 331, 6016, pp. 450-453, 2011
            29. 2011: J. Oerlemans, Jan2011,Science Express Index “2500 Years of European Climate Variability and Human Susceptibility”
            30. 2012: F. C. Ljungqvist. et al., Northern Hemisphere temperature patterns in the last 12 centuries, Clim. Past, 8, 227-240, 2012
            31. 2012: R. Rohde, et al., A New Estimate of the Average Earth Surface Land Temperature Spanning 1753 to 2011, J. Geophys. Res.
            32. 2012:J. Gergis, et al., “Evidence of unusual late 20th century warming from an AUSTRALASIAN temperature reconstruction spanning the last millennium”, J. Climate
            33. 2012: T. Melvin, H. Grudd, K. R. Briffa, Potential bias in ‘updating’ tree-ring chronologies using regional curve standardisation: Re-processing 1500 years of Torneträsk density and ring-width data, Holocene, Oct. 26, 2012
            34. 2012: F. C. Ljungqvist, et al., Northern Hemisphere temperature patterns in the last 12 centuries, Clim. Past, 8, 227,240, 2012
            35. 2013: N. J. Abram, et al., Acceleration of snow melt in an Antarctic Peninsula ice core during the twentieth century, Nature Geosci., 6, 404-411 (see figs. 4 and 5)
            36. 2013: S. A. Marcott, et al., A Reconstruction of Regional and Global Temperature for the Past 11,300 Years, Science, 8, 339, 6124, 1198-1201

          • Stan

            Missed all the deaths in Europe?
            Why are yo so fearful of facts?
            Do you have such a deep psychological investment that you can only look at stuff that supports your delusions?

            Increasing the temperature will result in fewer additional deaths because it will be offset by a larger reduction in cold weather deaths.
            Read a book, don’t be afraid of facts.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Buffoon you haven’t a clue what you’re mumbling on about. You would be wise to look up the primary sources and do the math. Mn order of magnitude more people die in heat affected areas. it’s simple … read all the books you want but that won’t change the data. You are the most gullible dumb ill-informed science-denyingcretin I have seen in quite awhile.

  • ToddM

    Global cooling could starve a billion people off of this planet. It has already begun. Now that El Nino has passed, the next 30-50 years are going to suck. Hopefully its just a 1950 to 1970’s kind of cool down, and not a mini ice age or full blown ice age. Warm was never a threat. Cold always way and we are woefully underprepared thanks to radical anti capitalists.

  • dixiedog

    “They” say the sun is about 5 billion years old. The readings “they” may have taken over the past hundred years or so give or take ain’t worth a pinch of puppy sheet as and indicator of what’ going on.

    • Leftwithrightbrain

      The sun is more or less the same age as the earth. The Earth is a little younger but the sun has etched a fair amount of evidence over those billions of years for us to review .. it’s called geological history.

  • daf62757

    Wow, only a couple hundred billion years left. Pass a tax to save the sun…….also pass gun control and LGBT protection laws since we know climate change affects those too!

  • Lance Cordill

    How does Hilary Clinton, General Petreaus and Snowden wind up in a comment section about an article on the sun?

  • MissV

    People we just need to give it up. There is only punishment for We the People. Government has a Teflon ass that lets them skate on everything. Face it we are F**KED in the USA and not a damn thing we can say or do about. Continue supporting a corrupt system until you are handing government a dollar bill for a piece of toilet paper to wipe your ass on. Since when did we let our government turn us into slaves and them start being our masters? Time for term limits or just let government have the whole country and tape our mouths shut permanently. Very sad state of affairs in the USA. Feinstein is the worst mistake that CA has ever made. When this Hillary twin bitch dies I am going to jump up and down. She should be in front of a firing squad for her own corruption. How many millions has she and her husband made off their pillow talk creating wars? Don’t talk to any of the above people about global warming, that is all a figment of our imaginations.

  • defender ofourfreedom

    THIS MEANS A DECREASE IN OZONE PRODUCTION THE PROTECTS LIFE ON EARTH FROM DEADLY UV.

    High levels of UV light cause skin cancer and the death of plants which means no food.

  • defender ofourfreedom

    SCIENCE, WHO NEEDS IT

    Screw the truth.

  • Mr. L

    This must be the fault of Exxon and George Bush.

  • sunnyvaleken

    Obama is full of hot air, lies, lies and more lies.

  • ladychurchillusa

    Not that any of this will affect our weather. Ask any liberal and they will tell you that the sun is the size of a quarter, so it clearly has no affect on us here on our big planet.

    • Leftwithrightbrain

      Science has no ideology. What bothers me more about the real morons who feed you this tripe is that we are launching ourselves into a new planet equilibrium that is unfriendly to our (human) and most of extant existence.

  • Nathan Bedford Forrest

    We’re being punished for not giving Al Gore $10 billion to stop GlobalClimateWarmingChange.

    • Stan

      Nothing causes CO2 reduction better than a big cash donation to the nearest snake oil salesman!

    • Duke Silver

      I’m wondering if a sacrifice to the sun god…. let’s say Al Gore…. might bring it back.

  • Stan

    Obama invited the Sun to the Whitehouse for a beer.

  • Stan

    So, what are all you AGW meatballs doing to save the planet, other than nagging us like a future ex-wife?

    Got your air conditioning turned off?
    Sold your car?
    Turned off your computer?

    • Leftwithrightbrain

      Your argument is a logical fallacy known as an ad hominem tu quoque. Whether one used zero fossil fuels, or burned 14 tons of coal just for fun every day would have no impact on whether or not AGW was real. Individual actions will not solve this global problem. Ameliorating the external forcing worldwide will be needed to transition from fossil fuels to other energy producing sources. Humans should be smart enough to find workable solutions but time is of the essence.

      • Stan

        In other words, nothing.
        You nag like a petulant old shrew, but do nothing.

        Your AGW theory cannot make accurate predictions, therefore the theory is garbage.

        • Leftwithrightbrain

          Nope. Your argument is a logical fallacy known as an ad hominem tu quoque. Here’s a challenge cupcake, AGW theory makes six predictions based on Arhennius’ AGW hypothesis that he postulated in 1896. Which one/s of the six that he made are “not accurate”. I must assume that you’re ignorant about the order of theory and hypothesis in science. If what you assert was true then AGW couldn’t be theory by definition whereas it has been accepted as such in climate science for at least 45 years. Please proceed …

          • Stan

            Sorry, there is nothing wrong with my argument.

            You missed the hundreds of doom predictions based on your theory that came up bust?
            I feel sorry for you.
            Seriously.
            You’ve been brainwashed.
            Learn to think for yourself.

            https://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/04/02/the-big-list-of-failed-climate-predictions/

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            You missed the hundreds of doom predictions based on your theory

            You’re a nescient git who is either a pernicious fool, a perfidious charlatan or mendacious obscurantist. Pick one. The theory only makes six predictions. So instead of puerile deflection, as usual, please share your vast albeit very illusive knowledge …

            Pro tip: Wattsupwiththat isn’t a science site. It’s a propaganda site trying to look like a science site, and failing more and more as it falls deeper and deeper into conspiracy theories and general crapola. Watts. Let that sink in for awhile. The guy who has no science background and has been wrong about just about everything he ever published. BEST ran his “grade A” station at his request, and they show the exact same warming. Watts slinked away without honoring his declaration that he’s conceded defeat if they showed the same warming. Watts has been wrong about ALL of his predictions, because he said the earth was cooling. And he was wrong about the stations and their overall reporting accuracy. He has no background in what he’s writing about, and it shows.

          • Stan

            I feel sorry for you.
            Some day you will realize, like Virginia did, that there is no Santa Claus for her, and no global warming crisis for you.
            When that day comes you will have to admit you were wrong, and a patsy, and a fool, and that all your brave little social justice warrior efforts were all for nothing.

            We can pile the evidence a mile high, but until you get over your pathetic little ego trip and look at that evidence, nothing will come of it.

            Seriously, I do feel sorry for you and your poor gullible comrades.
            You had the best intentions, but you just aren’t very smart.

            As for Watts, he listed the predictions, he didn’t make them.
            Your guys did.
            And they are almost all dead wrong.
            Which means the theory they are based on is wrong.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Weak pleonastic deflection of of off-topic vacuity. Here’s the original challenge you’re obfuscating, cupcake. AGW theory makes six predictions based on Arhennius’ AGW hypothesis that he postulated in 1896. Which one/s of the six that he made are “not accurate”. I must assume that you’re ignorant about the order of theory and hypothesis in science. If what you assert was true then AGW couldn’t be theory by definition whereas it has been accepted as such in climate science for at least 45 years. Please proceed …

          • Stan

            I’m still waiting to see what YOU are doing to fight global warming.
            Have you ripped the AC out of your house yet?
            Walking to work?
            No trips or holidays on airplanes?

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Perhaps someone in conversation should try responding and staying on topic instead of constant puerile and overt deflection and obfuscation or start a new thread. But judging from the sparseness and lack of robustness of your science heft and sources, I’m not confidant it would amount to a compelling one.

          • Stan

            So nothing.
            All you do is nag like a shrill and ugly old ex-wife, and you make no sacrifices to save the planet.

            I’m doing my bit to sequester carbon by throwing all my old newspapers in the landfill where the carbon in them will be sequestered.

          • Stan

            Poor old disqus, they have to protect you from the truth.

            Watts posted the predictions, he didn’t make them.
            Your guys made them based on your theory, and they are all wrong, so your theory is wrong.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            More deflection. You don’t need Watt’s to know what Arhennius’ AGW hypothesis was that he postulated in 1896. Which one/s of the six that he made are “not accurate”. It is very simple plus you have broadband and now you feign lack of knowledge. I’d wager you don’t have a clue where to begin. All hate no cattle. Please proceed …

          • Stan

            You should take a basic science class, and learn something about the scientific process.

            When your theory’s predictions are all garbage, your theory is garbage.
            Why do all temperature predictions based on your theory turn out to be very very wrong?

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            More deflection. You shouldn’t project your lack of science on to me … I taught you that CO₂ was not plant food … something you learn from grade 3 on wards. Now you have repetitively been unable to give the predictions made by Arhennius’ AGW hypothesis? Why? You also incorrectly state that climate science made incorrect temperature predictions when climate science doesn’t predict … if you have any science knowledge you’d know that.

          • Stan

            So all those climate scientists making climate predictions are not basing the predictions on their climate theories?
            Yeah, we kinda knew that….

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            More deflection. This insidiously dumb conservative science-denying cünt stuck in stupidity can never answer a question with out deflection.

          • Stan

            You are totally lost, and out of your depth.
            Any theory that cannot make accurate predictions is garbage.

            Do I need to show the list of failed predictions again?

            Did you figure out how many trees Mann actually used to determine the temperature of the entire planet?
            LOL!
            I am truly amazed you do not understand just how far out to lunch that was!
            Why don’t you look at all the evidence, not just what confirms your biases?
            Is it a ego protection strategy?
            The longer you wait to admit you have been a gigantic patsy the longer you can pretend and preen as a social justice warrior saving the world?
            At some point you need to look at the science.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            More deflection. This insidiously dumb conservative science-denying cünt stuck in stupidity can never answer a question with out deflection.

            Do I need to show the list of failed predictions again?

            You’re either delusional or a liar. Pick one. As you have failed to give the predictions made by Arhennius’ AGW hypothesis …we’re still waiting. Do you think no one else can read your stupid comments of vacuity?

          • Stan

            So you still can’t account for why the predictions based on the AGW theory turn out to be wrong?
            I’ll give you a hint, the theory is wrong.
            Why are you deflecting?

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            More deflection. This insidiously dumb conservative science-denying cünt stuck in stupidity can never answer a question with out deflection.

          • Stan

            http://dailycaller.com/2015/05/04/25-years-of-predicting-the-global-warming-tipping-point/

            http://www.c3headlines.com/predictionsforecasts/

            I understand that your SJW psyche is too delicate to process contradictory evidence, but someday when you get the mental strength you should have a look….

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            More deflection. This insidiously dumb conservative science-denying cünt stuck in stupidity can never answer a question with out deflection. You have failed to give the predictions made by Arhennius’ AGW hypothesis …we’re still waiting. Do you think no one else can read your stupid comments of vacuity?

          • Stan

            I see you are having a hard time processing reality.
            Your delicate mind cannot handle any evidence that does not reinforce your spoon fed climate cult dogma.

            Warmer is still better.
            See that?
            The basic assumptions of your AGW doomsday cult are wrong.
            And all the predictions and assumptions derived from that false premise are wrong too.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            More deflection. This insidiously dumb conservative science-denying cünt stuck in stupidity can never answer a question with out deflection. You’ve already asked these silly questions and we are waiting for your answers and evidence to give the predictions made by Arhennius’ AGW hypothesis that have failed in your mental dwarf mind … we’re still waiting. Do you think no one else can read your stupid comments of vacuity?

          • Stan

            I’ve asked the questions and you are waiting for my answers?
            HUH?

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Nope you made false assertions and have not been able to provide evidence to support your fabrications. In fact you don’t even know what predictions were made by Arhennius’ AGW hypothesis and which one/s failed according to you. You’d win a Nobel if that were true so we know why you are avoiding stating the theory as all predictions are not falsifiable. Hence your proclivity for jejune deflection.

          • Stan

            Your AGW doomsday cult is pretty cool, but the moonies had better uniforms!

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Q. Why can’t science-deniers understand the difference between science and religion/cult?A. Because they are uneducated nescient science-deniers, of course and it doesn’t push their prejudiced and non-scientific narrative devoid of evidence that requires belief.

          • Stan

            Your AGW cult is not science based.
            If it was, you would be able to explain why all of the predictions it makes are WRONG!

            Science changes in the face of new evidence, your doomsday cult is stuck on stupid, and stuck with it’s record of failed predictions.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Thank you for confirming that you are neither a scientist nor scientifically literate but rather grossly and obnoxiously nescient about climate science..

          • Stan

            Sorry, I didn’t confirm that, in fact I use science every day.
            Physics and chemistry mostly.

            Still waiting for you to explain all those failed predictions, and to explain that whole arctic ice thing!
            Or are you walking back that tipping point nonsense?

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            There was absolutely no need to confirm that you are neither a scientist nor scientifically literate but rather grossly and obnoxiously nescient about climate science, as that was self-evident from the beginning.

            Or are you walking back that tipping point nonsense

            You’re either a pernicious fool or a perfidious charlatan. Pick one. I have made no such assertion. You’re an insidiously dumb conservative science-denying cünt stuck in stupidity displaying rampant inferiority complexes with a very low response dopamine reward center for a great ape. Seek professional help before you do yourself or others an injury.

          • Stan

            Yeah you did.
            Denier.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            What tipping point … care to share where I made that assertion? making up $h!t just confirms that you’re an insidiously dumb conservative science-denying cünt stuck in stupidity.

          • Stan

            Why don’t you explain why all the predictions made by your AGW doomsday cult are wrong?
            Sun was in your eyes?
            Dog ate your hockey stick?

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            More deflection. This insidiously dumb conservative science-denying cünt stuck in stupidity can never answer a question with out deflection. You have failed to give the predictions made by Arhennius’ AGW hypothesis …we’re still waiting. Do you think no one else can read your stupid comments of vacuity?

          • Stan

            Tell me more about the arctic ice disappearing, that was hilarious!

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            More deflection. This insidiously dumb conservative science-denying cünt stuck in stupidity can never answer a question with out deflection.

          • Stan

            Your AGW doomsday cult seems to have not provided you with enough song sheets.

            Or is this descent into madness a result of you finally shedding your brave social justice warrior persona and finally admitting you have been duped by the scam artists in the AGW cult.
            How much money and time did you give them anyway?

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Stop deflecting and we can move on. You’re stuck on the answers to a hypothesis that grade 3 kids can answer. We can move on once you can answer your silliness. Your knowledge of science is worse than pitiful. Did you even graduate middle school or are you just another red state idiot running your mouth?

          • Stan

            A grade three kid might be able to answer, but you can’t.
            Why have all the AGW doomdsay cult predictions turned out to be wrong?

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            More deflection. This insidiously dumb conservative science-denying cünt stuck in stupidity can never answer a question with out deflection. We can move on to school you on other topics when you’re done with the first one that has you you stumped:

            Give the predictions made by Arhennius’ AGW hypothesis …we’re still waiting. Then tell us which ones were falsifiable as everyone else who has done science knows that they’re unfalsifiable and why AGW is now one of the strongest and most solid theories in physics.

          • Stan

            Where is the latest ‘tipping point’ fairy tale to scare the children with?

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Stop deflecting and we can move on. You’re stuck on the answers to a hypothesis that grade 3 kids can answer. We can move on once you can answer your silliness. Your knowledge of science is worse than pitiful. Did you even graduate middle school or are you just another red state idiot running your mouth?

          • Stan

            I see you are completely lost, and desperately trying to avoid answering why all the AGW predictions are wrong.
            Stop deflecting, man up, and face reality.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            There are invertebrates with more backbone than you. There is only one deflector here and it’s you. We’re waiting. Please proceed …

          • Stan

            My backbone is fine, unlike yours.
            I think for myself, you are a parrot who knows not what he parrots.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            More deflection. This insidiously dumb conservative science-denying cünt stuck in stupidity can never answer a question with out deflection.

          • Stan

            More deflection.
            You still won’t answer why all the predictions about doom and gloom are wrong.

            Warmer is better, get used to it.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            More pathetic deflection. Mimicry is a sure sign that you know I have wiped the floor with your dumb a$$ … instead of wasting time flattering me why don’t you man up and provide the evidence for the crapola you spew … it’s running into days now that you’re displaying your stupidity and incompetence.

          • Stan

            You’rehaving a bad, day: I’ve asked you several simple questions about your pathetic doomsday cult and you can’t answer any of them.
            A theory that results in wrong predictions is wrong.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            More deflection. There are invertebrates with more backbone than you. This insidiously dumb conservative science-denying cünt stuck in stupidity can never answer a question with out deflection. Give the predictions made by Arhennius’ AGW hypothesis …we’re still waiting. Then tell us which ones were falsifiable as everyone else who has done science knows that they’re unfalsifiable and why AGW is now one of the strongest and most solid theories in physics.

          • Stan

            Shhhhhhhh
            Shush there, don’t cry, you’ll find some other wild scam or cult to join.

            Why are all the predictions based on your theory so wildly wrong?
            Where are all the doomsday scenarios your cult predicted?

            And warmer is still better.

          • Stan

            You’re the guy desperately trying to avoid the question of why your theory’s predictions are all wrong.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Still deflecting. You’re either delusional or a liar. Pick one. As you have failed to give the predictions made by Arhennius’ AGW hypothesis …we’re still waiting. Do you think no one else can read your stupid comments of vacuity?

          • Stan

            You’ve gone totally down the rabbit hole.
            Why are all those AGW temperature predictions WRONG?

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Still deflecting. You’re either delusional or a liar. Pick one. As you have failed to give the predictions made by Arhennius’ AGW hypothesis …we’re still waiting. Do you think no one else can read your stupid comments of vacuity?

  • The one major effect the writer pointedly chose to not mention was the possibility of a global cooling such as what occurred during the last minimum period.

    • Stan

      If he mentioned that he could lose his membership in the Better
      Understanding of Liberal Logic and Scientific Hysteria Incontinence
      Team.
      BULLSHIT for short..

    • Leftwithrightbrain

      False. The last minimum cycle started 50 years after the LIA had started.

  • Stan

    If he mentioned that he could lose his membership in the Better Understanding of Liberal Logic and Scientific Hysteria Incontinence Team.
    BULLSHIT for short..

  • Yars

    Seeing the headline of this article immediately struck a chord… Something tells me that the AGW hysteria that has swept (the gullible) and empowered (the Tyrannical), is about to be turned on its head…

  • vdorta

    Obama and the alarmists have robbed our citizens of billions to stop AGW. I’d love to see the lawsuits when global cooling begins in earnest.

    • Leftwithrightbrain

      Neither you, nor your succeeding 160 generations will be around to collect assuming your grandchildren’s generation have figured out a way to survive in a habitat that they and extant didn’t evolve in.

  • David Bolander

    I’m selling “solar offset credits”, Gore, Obama and Soros are lining up to buy them.

  • greggreen29

    Fascinating. Even something as simple as a ball of fire is filled with mysteries.

  • AngryBlonde

    Get out your woolly knickers, I think we are being lied too…………….again!

  • No problem. All we have to do is pay more taxes for our masters to turn up the thermostat.

  • steve

    Must be all those fossils fuels we use causing this.

  • anon

    The sun’s light is what heats the earth. The solar wind and sun spots only have an effect on the outer atmosphere, which changes the strength of the Aurora, and has no effect on our climate.

  • rbblum

    But, it is, it is caused by global warming.

  • another_engineer

    Looks like another little ice age is upon us..

    i wonder what new ploy the Goracle will pull for money. Calling bill nye .. calling bill nye (because when I want cosmological information, i ask a guy with a bachelor’s degree in mechanical engineering)

  • C. D. Carney

    Back before Nat Geo and the History Channel started to global warmify their documentaries they let one very interesting historical fact slip. The documentary on Krakatoa stated during the eruption that destroyed that island and caused a year without a summer it released more pollutants into the atmosphere than all humanity has since the beginning of history combined. Is there climate change? I recognize things are a bit warmer than they used to be. But islands haven’t disappeared (don’t even think about the Maldives, they are coral islets and they have never been over 8 feet above sea level, that’s not an island, that’s a sandbar with palm trees), the coasts haven’t flooded, the ice caps are growing thicker if not wider, and if anything it appears our own Sun is to blame.

  • +One

    Global Warming! Global Cooling. Climate Change. Aw, screw it-they are just going to tax the living crap out of us anyway so what difference does the excuse make?

    • Leftwithrightbrain

      Because letting world civilization and most of extant end, that’ll definitely save some bucks.

  • M the Shark

    I guess then the environazis have the fitting name “climate change” so when it cools, they can say it is just a fluke… We are still DOOOOOMED!

    • Stan

      Climate stagnation will be the Next Big Thing!

  • round them up

    Can you stop with the spraying now?

  • smokeybandit
  • my2¢

    Im sorry for the sun thing….its my fault for being a human walking around on planet earth.

  • carl6352

    the true cause of heating cooling and climate change staring at us every day!

    • Leftwithrightbrain

      Homo sapiens sapiens have been around for at least 250 ka. We lived alongside and bred with Neanderthals if you have ancestors from Europe/Asia you have Neanderthal and Denisovan genes. We nearly went extinct in one of the glacials.

      • carl6352

        Wrong Homo sapiens are modern man ha be been around for just over 20,000 years while the cro magnon was around for 40,000 years where did you learn science! Boobs farm

        • Leftwithrightbrain

          We might be writing at cross purposes as the anatomical modern human is first found in the fossil record about 200 ka ago.

  • CptNerd

    Note that Dr. Hathaway hasn’t updated his predictions since January of this year. The graph is sorely out of date. I wonder why…

  • RobertReade

    Solar system change is a result of our earthly climate change activities. When are we going to learn that we are endangering the entire universe. Vote Hillary, vote Democrat!

    • zen

      Heh. You have no idea how many would buy that.

      • RobertReade

        Would I have said it were it not so?

      • RobertReade

        Happy you’re smart enough not to have. I’ll drink to you on our next full moon if it isn’t first obliterated by our solar system polluters.

  • Will R

    The global warming alarmists will tell us the weak solar cycle is due to global warming. Sad thing is the moonbats will believe it.

  • catherwood

    we must stop this paucity of sunspots quickly before it triggers even more catastrophic climate change.I recommend a manned mission to the surface of the sun to replace missing spots. Al Gore, Obama, and Hilary ( first women on manned solar mission!!) for the crew.

  • Clam Mato

    My g-d will this AGW disaster never end!? It’s ELE TEOTWAWKI! This is what happens when you drive an SUV and leave your air conditioning on. Will we ever learn!?

    My work is done here.
    Carry on.

  • David Boothby

    Not only that but red algae are running wild up on the polar ice caps according to Tech Times.If you combine that with the rising tides from melting ice caps and the sun going blank causing sea levels to rise dangerously, very soon flooding all our major coastal cities, well it’s self evident that global warming will soon cause the global destruction of the earth.

    • Leftwithrightbrain

      That’s above most folks pay grade here.

      • Wiley Coyote

        Well, maybe not for all of them. A lot of the brighter ones are unable to find a job.

  • Wiley Coyote

    Goodbye to “Global Warming.” Hello to “Mini Ice Age.”

    • Leftwithrightbrain

      Why? Care to explicate?

      • Wiley Coyote

        During the period from 1600 through 1800, dubbed the “Maunder Minimum” or “Mini Ice Age”, there were no sun spots at all to be found on the Sun, and the world experienced significantly cooler temperatures than normal. It wasn’t that people weren’t looking for them. Gallileo had discovered spots on the Sun in the 16th Century.

        • Leftwithrightbrain

          Something is wrong with your data … the Maunder minimum started 50 years after the LIA which in itself was not global? There is no correlation between the Maunder minimum and cooling.

    • David Boothby

      Never were truer words spoken Wiley.The sun going blank means less heat. Less heat means colder weather on earth more than likely ( and I’m sure well-respected scientists differ on this ) causing as you say so eloquently a Mini Ice Age .Well this is not good. What are we going to do ? Wring our hands ? Look to Obama Hillary or Trump for answers ? No No No. Think about it. What is our God today ? Our leader ? The Computer !! Merely put all the relevant climate change material into the computer press the button and like magic the answer is there. Do as the Computer says and all will be fine. All will be fine. All will be fine. All will be fine…………………….we will avoid the anvil of death crushing us into the ground.

      • Wiley Coyote

        Actually, the great science fiction writer Isaac Asimov wrote a short story in the late 1940’s something like that entitled “The Last Question.” From time to time people throughout the ages keep asking their computers, from the earliest vacuum tube models through the later transistorized ones of the 1950’s up through mainframes of the 1970’s through PC’s of the 1990’s through hand held computers “the Last Question.” The Question is simply stated, “Can entropy be reversed?” According to Isaac Newton’s Second Law of Thermodynamics, entropy cannot be reversed. Entropy is the quality or property of energy flowing out of things or of more complicated structures being rendered over time as more simplified ones. All the computers in the story over the course of decades, centuries, millennia, ages and epochs always answer with the same reply “Too little data for a meaningful response.” Until, finally …. Oops! I almost gave away the ending!

        • David Boothby

          it’s ok just keep it between you and me

  • Pesak Hraap

    The heat from the earth burns off sunspots. 99% of scientists agree so there can be no arguments. Settled science. Its obvious. No more comments will be allowed on this subject. Move on.

    • Wiley Coyote

      That statement certainly makes about as much sense as anything else about the doctrine of Anthropogenic Global Warming.

  • artmofo

    No question at all . . . this is OBAMA’S FAULT. Worst president ever!

  • A Day

    If The Lord becomes sufficiently irked, it’s lights-out altogether…

  • Skep41

    Luckily public-spirited citizens like me are burning old tires and disconnecting our catalytic converters to help keep you Warmunist hippies from freezing.

  • NurdIIII

    Tell Obama to tax the sun to get it to work like he wants it?

    • Can’t his NASA Muslim outreach program do something to fix this?

  • Freempg

    No problem. We have a second sun to take up the slack.

    https://owlcation.com/stem/Nemesis-Is-there-a-Second-Sun-in-the-Solar-System

  • Hypertiger

    Watch

    Following Wolf’s numbering scheme, the 1755–1766 cycle is traditionally numbered “1”. Wolf created a standard sunspot number index, the Wolf index, which continues to be used today.

    17:55 = 5:55

    1755/5 = 351

    3 x 51 = 153 = The archangel michael

    153 reverse is 351

    with

    1 = A
    26 = Z

    1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8+9+10+11+12+13+14+15+16+17+18+19+20+21+22+23+24+25+26 = 351

    Vowels = AEIOU

    1+5+9+15+21 = 51 = Michael…the angel of revelation

    126

    30th prime = 113 = 4th prime that adds to 5
    32nd prime = 131 = 5th prime that adds to 5
    64th prime = 311 = 6th prime that adds to 5

    30+32+64 = 126

    113+131+311 = 555

    456+654 = 1110

    1110/2 = 555

    1110+555+126 = 1791 reverse is 1971

    The year I was born

    1971-1755 = 216

    6 x 6 x 6 = 216

    216 = Saint michael the archangel

    25th and 26th solar cycles

    25+26 = 51 = Michael

    1941 to 1971 = spring = 3
    1971 to 2001 = summer = 6
    2001 to 2031 = Fall = 9

    2031 = beginning of winter

    20+31 = 51 = Michael or Mars which is cold

    1941-30 = 1911

    2031+30 = 2061

    20+61 = 81 = Venus which is warm like spring in relation to winter

    This is what the tool called the Internet I helped to put into your hands shows me when I use it to show me further out…

    “In 2015, a new model of the solar cycle was published. The model draws on dynamo effects in two layers of the Sun, one close to the surface and one deep within its Convection zone. Model predictions suggest that solar activity will fall by 60 per cent during the 2030s to conditions last seen during the ‘Little ice age’ that began in 1645. Prior models included only the deeper dynamo.[84]

    The model features paired magnetic wave components. Both components have a frequency of approximately 11 years, although their frequencies are slightly different and temporally offset. Over the cycle, the waves fluctuate between the Sun’s northern and southern hemispheres.[84]

    The model used principal component analysis of the Magnetic field observations from the Wilcox Solar Observatory. They examined magnetic field activity from solar cycles 21-23, covering 1976-2008. They also compared their predictions to average Sunspot numbers. The model was 97% accurate in predicting solar activity fluctuations.”[84]

    play time is ending…work time is beginning…

    2017 there is a total eclipse in the USA…

    2017-1755 = 262

    262/2 = 131

    131 = Hypertiger

    131 = paradigm shift

    A paradigm shift, as identified by American physicist and philosopher Thomas Kuhn, is a fundamental change in the basic concepts and experimental practices of a scientific discipline. Kuhn contrasted these shifts, which characterize a scientific revolution, to the activity of normal science, which he described as scientific work done within a prevailing framework (or paradigm). In this context, the word “paradigm” is used in its original meaning, as “example” (Greek: παράδειγμα).

    The nature of scientific revolutions has been a question posed by modern philosophy since Immanuel Kant used the phrase in the preface to his Critique of Pure Reason (1781), referring to Greek mathematics and Newtonian physics. In the 20th century, new crises in the basic concepts of mathematics, physics, and biology, revitalized interest in the question among scholars.

  • Nathan Bedford Forrest

    The only way out of this is to pay Al Gore the $10 billion he wants to end GlobalClimateCoolingWarmingChange.

    • Stan

      Large cash donations cause global cooling!

  • Tell_Me_No_Lies

    It’s sad (and tedious) to realize how many people view everything in the world (and apparently beyond) through their narrow, twisted, politically ideological prism.

  • right to left

    I’m interested in the dog that’s not barking here…specifically Marc Moron and idiot minions commenting here about everything else besides the fact that severe drop in sunspot activity blows up that bullshit claim a few years back that global warming increases and decreases with solar activity!

  • Stan

    The dog ate my global warming!

    • right to left

      The dog should eat irrelevant stuff like Clinton vs Trump.

    • Hey, the dog ate her emails then Barry ate the dog.

  • Aw geez, another excuse for Obama’s crappy economy.

  • Steve

    So the spots on Obama’s half white ass… wait… wrong story

  • Dunnyveg

    Those evil non-liberal whites! Now they are blotting out the sun! We need more immigrants–such as terrorists, lesbians, and headhunters–to get us straightened out. Yeah, that’s the ticket…..

  • Howard Stern ✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

    Guess there goes nibilus

  • pyl16349

    Time for some new government regulations. We need to fix this.

  • IoSid

    Here is one forecast of future sunspot numbers based on multiple oscillations identified in the historic data as being highly probably. Looks to me like some cold coming later in this century if this works out as forecast..

    Short version:
    http://i.imgur.com/HyLJ4Hf.gif
    Longer version:
    http://i.imgur.com/Cna8az2.gif

  • cookcreative

    All of a sudden we know everything there is to know about the sun’s most subtle sunspot cycles, but we can’t quite figure out how the sun interacts with the earth’s climate causing, dare I say, climate change!

    • Leftwithrightbrain

      That is a classic non sequitur. What is it do you think that is missing from our toolbox of evidence that we are unsure about or don’t know that would revise 200 years of physics?

      • cookcreative

        Toolbox? You wouldn’t happen to be a government shill working for the NOAA would you?

        • Leftwithrightbrain

          Perhaps someone in conversation should try responding and staying on topic or start a new thread.

          • cookcreative

            What topic would you like to discuss, Mr. science guy? Is it not NASA’s and the government’s official position that global warming is due to anthropogenic climate change and not that of our sun? Since we know so much about the sun, as displayed in this well-written article, why is it ignored when discussing climate change? But I digress. Let’s all talk about space junk. That’s pretty cool!

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            No need to deflect … just stay on topic … explicate your sun/solar/climate remark.

            Since we know so much about the sun, as displayed in this well-written article, why is it ignored when discussing climate change

            You’re either delusional or a liar. Pick one. Especially when it is acknowledged as a fundamental in climate science that axial orbital nutation is the prime forcing for natural internal climate change.

          • All Lives Matter

            What a jacka$$…Thanks DISQUS for user block.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Projection of personal fault is puerile.

  • tenndave

    What good are laws if when broken the system ignores them. Clinton is but one example. Obama has misused Executive Mandates but only one has made it to the supreme court once because everyone is afraid of being called a racist to challenge it. When he tells border agents to stand down he breaks the law. When he allows sanctuary cities without penalty he ignores the law. When he fails to enforce the constitution he breaks law but only if charged. As long as charges are not brought the law is mute. The example we have set for our children is that laws are only enforced if it benefits one party otherwise just ignore it.

    • Leftwithrightbrain

      Wrong thread … I believe you want to to losers.com and post there. This is supposed to be for conservatives to learn about science. They’re struggling enough as it is without distraction from you.

  • jeremycouts

    ya’ll need to shut up. Hillary is running for president. Do you want to commit suicide against your will?

  • James Bernard

    Hey you goofy “sun worshipping” liberals.
    The sun DIRECTLY affects ALL WEATHER on this planet.
    Now……take your carbon footprints and “shove em” where the sun don’t shine.

    • Leftwithrightbrain

      Science has no ideology. What bothers me more about the real morons who feed you this tripe is that we are launching ourselves into a new planet equilibrium that is unfriendly to our (human) and most of extant existence. This may come as a surprise to you but solar input is a fundamental of climate science that causes natural change due mainly to axial orbital nutation forcings.

      • St8kout

        Well, REAL science has no ideology, but what we are repeatedly seeing is JUNK science from a political agenda, namely Global Warming. It was suspicious from day one, when there was a worldwide suppression of scientists who said the facts do not show it. There was never a discussion. We only heard one side because the opposing side was silenced. That makes it JUNK science when there’s no open honest debate.

        • Leftwithrightbrain

          Thank you for confirming that you are neither a scientist nor scientifically literate but rather obnoxiously nescient about climate science. When you can provide some peer-reviewed science rather than fabricated denier talking points you may get somewhere.

          There was never a discussion

          You’re either delusional or a liar. Pick one. Science started talking about it 200 years ago and reached consensus about 45 years ago. Sorry you didn’t get to partake but the entrance fee requires smarts, education and knowledge..

  • James Bernard

    Gee…..according to my analysis of the graph, sun spot activity has reduced by about 40% in the last 100 years.
    …….and this info has ZERO to do with “computer models”

    • Leftwithrightbrain

      What are you concluding … the planet has warmed while sunspot activity has declined … so sunspots don’t cause the current unprecedented warming?

      • St8kout

        I guess you are the last to hear it. There’s been no global warming for the last 17 years or so.

        • Leftwithrightbrain

          Where do you go to get duped? I can’t find what you write in published science.

          • St8kout
          • St8kout

            You DO realize global warming has nothing to do with the science. I knew it was a scam from day one when every scientist who knew it wasn’t real, was silenced. Anything there are no facts backing up some theory, they NEVER want an open and honest debate. They did the same thing with evolution. It’s not science and has to be legislated by law instead of by facts.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Your respose is the most juvenile load of unadulterated horseSh!t I’ve seen in awhile.
            Q. Why can’t science-deniers understand the difference between science and a scam/hoax?A. Because they are uneducated, nescient, science-deniers, of course and are those kids that always lose, and rather than getting better, they just claim everyone else cheats or it’s a conspiracy to fool them.

          • Stan

            You are the one denying the science.

            Did Albert Einstein whine about relativity deniers, or did he present his theory for all to see, and for all to examine?

            And when presented with a book called 100 Scientists Against Einstein he simply asked, “Why 100, all it takes is one to prove my theory wrong.”

            Anyone using the term ‘global warming denier’ or ‘climate change denier’ is not familiar with science in any way.
            It’s a cult.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            You can’t even quote Einstein correctly how do you expect to know any science?

            Q. Why can’t science-deniers understand the difference between science and a cult?A. Because they are uneducated nescient science-deniers, of course and it doesn’t push their prejudiced and non-scientific narrative devoid of evidence that requires belief.

          • Stan

            Yes, Einstein did understand that science is not a show of hands.
            You don’t, but he did.

            You are the science denier, there are over 100 climate scientists listed that explain how Mann’s work is garbage, yet you still spout it like it is gospel.
            Well, to you and your cult, it is gospel.

            It’s a shame to see you waste all that effort defending your bizarre cult.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            To paraphrase Einstein … it only takes one to publish and show his hypothesis is false … strange that not one of your “100” have published successfully and rebutted or refuted Mann … yet there are now 42 papers and counting that validate his original paper.

          • Stan
          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Pro tip: joannenova.com isn’t a science site. It’s a propaganda site masquerading as a science site designed to dupe the gullible, uneducated and ill-informed. It falls deeper and deeper into conspiracy theories and general crapola as the unprecedented warming continues unabated driven by human-induced CO₂. Being scientifically illiterate and gullible you were successfully duped by them.

          • Stan

            Always attacking the messenger.
            She quotes Mann, and the IPPC retractions, but you are too invested in your SJW cult to notice.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Hearsay and opinion are meaningless. FYI: you were solidly duped if you believe IPCC makes retractions … care to cite the evidence from verifiable authoritative sources outside your science-denying bubble?

          • Stan

            Well, you are right in not considering the IPCC to be a reliable source, but they have retracted their dire predictions and re-issued less dire predictions.
            Or haven’t you been paying attention to current events?

            Try to keep up.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            IPCC is the most reliable source for interpreting climate science research. Obviously you’re clueless and ignorant to how it functions and once again present nothing but hearsay and your prejudiced feelings and opinion.

        • Stan

          Mother Nature is paid by Big Oil….

      • James Bernard

        Oh my…..this is too easy.
        YOUR analysis that the planet is warming is complete, unadulterated

  • Bruce Rodd

    All this Blather has something to do with sunspots in what way?

  • Dindoo Nuffin

    And in other news, Algore is still a flaming dildo.

  • Rosemariecterry4
  • St8kout

    For those who missed it, there was an arctic expedition to gather proof that the ice caps were vanishing. The ship got stuck in the massive amount of ice.

    Also, NASA reported that the Antarctic ice reached record highs in 2012-2014. https://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/antarctic-sea-ice-reaches-new-record-maximum

    Too bad, Al.

    • Stan

      The ice is in the pay of Big Oil….

  • Stan

    “Global warming believers are like a hysterical ‘cult’: MIT scientist compares ‘climate alarmists’ to religious fanatics

    Comments were made by professor of meteorology, Richard Lindzen”

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2922553/Global-warming-believers-like-hysterical-cult-MIT-scientist-compares-climate-alarmists-religious-fanatics.html#ixzz4CpQ2mpTn

    • Leftwithrightbrain

      Are you referring to the disgraced former MIT professor emeritus who resigned to avoid being fired for scientific fraud and becoming a paid fossil-fuel propagandist?

      • Stan

        No.
        Any luck with that arctic ice tipping point yet, or are you publicly admitting you were wrong?

        • Leftwithrightbrain

          No. Any luck with that arctic ice tipping point yet, or are you publicly admitting you were wrong?

          You’re either delusional or a liar. Pick one. There is only one ex-prof. Lindzen from MIT, so being gullible and uneducated you are easily duped by his nonsense? What tipping point … care to share where I made that assertion?

          • Stan

            Ahh, so no tipping point now?
            Is that your newest position?

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            What tipping point … care to share where I made that assertion?

          • Stan

            Your memory is going too.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Don’t be coy or shy … share and valid your comment with evidence or remain a liar for all to see.

  • Stan

    Warmer is better:

    http://www.spectator.co.uk/2013/10/carry-on-warming/

    “There are many likely effects of climate change: positive and
    negative, economic and ecological, humanitarian and financial. And if
    you aggregate them all, the overall effect is positive today — and
    likely to stay positive until around 2080. That was the conclusion of
    Professor Richard Tol of Sussex University after he reviewed 14
    different studies of the effects of future climate trends.
    To be precise, Prof Tol calculated that climate change would be
    beneficial up to 2.2˚C of warming from 2009 (when he wrote his paper).”

    • Leftwithrightbrain

      Prof. Tol who failed to pass peer-review in the prestigious climate journals is your source from secondary non-scientific sources. Wow, you must be a snake oil salesman’s dream customer!

      • Stan

        Peer review?
        I guess you never heard of retractionwatch.
        Or pal review.
        Having a parrot ape your paper in exchange for you aping his is not review.
        Nor is it scientific.

        • Leftwithrightbrain

          Typical uneducated necient git who has never published let alone having passed HS science thinks it is competent to comment on peer-reviewed science. It is the best and most thorough method in which knowledge is shared and debated … doesn’t mean there could be some errors etc. but those are all soon discovered and ejected or refuted. You have no clue how science works.

          • Stan

            If you think peer review is some gold standard you are a lot further gone than I thought.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            It is absolutely the gold standard for science. If you had taken a science class in HS or knew of something better you wouldn’t be so keen to make a fool of yourself.

          • Stan

            You’ve totally lost it now!

            Do you even know what peer review is?
            Good God man, quit making such a fool of yourself.

            Peer review, LOL!

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Why is science as foreign as Sanskrit for you?

          • Stan

            It’s not.
            Why are you gullible enough to suggest that peer review isn’t a joke?
            Mann’s fake hockey stick was peer reviewed.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Confirmation of the hockey stick (through 2013):
            1. 1998: K. R. Briffa, et al., Influence of volcanic eruptions on Northern Hemisphere summer temperature over the past 600 years, Nature, 393, 450-455, 4 June 1998
            2. 2000: T. J. Crowley, Causes of Climate Change over the Past 1000 Years, Science, 289, 270
            3. 2000: S. Huang, H. N. Pollack, P. Y. Shen, Temperature trends over the past five centuries reconstructed from borehole temperatures, Nature Letts., 403, 756-758
            4. 2002: C. Bertrand, et al., Climate of the last millennium: a sensitivity study, Tellus, 54,3,2210244, May
            5. 2002: J. Esper, Cook, Schweingruber, Low-Frequency Signals in Long Tree-Ring Chronologies for Reconstructing Past Temperature Variability, Science, 295, 5563, pp.2250-2253, Mar. 22, 2002
            6. T. M. Cronin et al., MWP, LIA, and 20th century temperature variability from Chesapeake Bay, Global Planetary Change, 36, 2003, 17-29
            7. 2004: H. N. Pollack, J. E. Smerdon, Borehole climate reconstructions: Spatial structure and hemispheric averages, J. Geophys. Res., 109, D11106, 9pp, 2004
            8. 2005: E. Jansen, et al., “Extracting a Climate Signal from 169 Glacier Records”, Science, 308,5722,675-677, Apr
            9. 2005: A. Moberg et al. Northern Hemisphere 2,000 year Temperature Reconstruction using low and high-res proxy data
            10. 2005: S. Rutherford, et al., “Proxy-Based Northern Hemisphere Temperature Reconstructions”, J.Clim,18, 2308-2329,2005
            11. 2005: R. Wilson, et al., “Highly variable Northern Hemisphere temperatures reconstructed from low/high-resolution proxy data”, Nature,433,7026,613-617,Feb2005
            12. 2006: R. D’Arrigo, et al., On the long-term context for late twentieth century warming”. J.Geophys.Res.,111(D3)
            13. 2006: T. J. Osborn, K.R. Briffa, “The Spatial Extent of 20th-Century Warmth in the Context of the Past 1200 Years”.Science311(5762):841-844,2006
            14. 2007: A. Moberg, et al., Ch 6: Palaeoclimate, IPCC 4th Assessment Report, 2007
            15. 2007: R. Wilson, et al., “A matter of divergence:Tracking recent warming at hemispheric scales using tree ring data”, J.Geophys.Res.,112,D17103,Sept2007
            16. 2007: J. Jouzel, et al., “Orbital and Millennial Antarctic Climate Variability over the Past 800,000 Years”, Science, 317,5839,793-797,Aug2007.
            17. 2007: M. Ammann and E. Wahl, Climatic Change, 85, 1-2 , 71-88
            18. 2007: M. N. Juckes, Millennial temperature reconstruction intercomparison and evaluation, Clim. Past, 3, 591-609, 2007
            19. 2007: Wilson et al. N. Hemisphere Tree-Ring-Based Temperature Reconstruction 1750-2005, J. Geophys. Res., 112, D17103, 11 Sept.
            20. 2007: E. R. Wahl, C. M. Ammann, Robustness of the Mann, Bradley, Hughes reconstruction of Northern Hemisphere surface temperatures: Examination of criticisms based on the nature and processing of proxy climate evidence, Climatic Change, 85:33-69, 2007
            21. 2008: A. Moberg, R. Mohammad, T. Mauritsen, Analysis of the Moberg et al. (2005)hemispheric temperature reconstruction, Clim. Dyn. 31, 7-8, 957-971, Dec. 2008
            22. 2009: D. S. Kaufman, et al., Recent Warming Reverses Long-Term Arctic Cooling, Science, 325, 1236 (2009)
            23. 2009: H. von Storch, Zorita, Gonzalez-Rouco, Assessment of three Temperature Reconstruction Methods in the Virtual Reality of a Climate Simulation, Int. J. Earth Sci. , 98, 1, 2009
            24/25. 2010: M.P. Tingley, P. Huybers, “A Bayesian Algorithm for Reconstructing Climate Anomalies in Space and Time. Part I: Development and Applications to Paleoclimate Reconstruction Problems”; Part II: Comparison with the Regularized Expectation-Maximization Algorithm”. J.Clim.23 (10):2759-2800,2010
            26. 2010: D. Frank, et al., A noodle, hockey stick, and spaghetti plate: a perspective on high-resolution paleoclimatology, WIREs, Climate Change, 1, 4, 507-516, July/Aug. 2010
            27. 2011: J. Martin-Chivelet, et al., Land surface temperature changes in Northern Iberia since 4000yrBP, based on δ13C of speleothems, Global and Planetary Change, 77,1-2, pp 1-12, 2011
            28. 2011: R. F. Spielhagen, et al., Enhanced Modern Heat Transfer to the Arctic by Warm Atlantic Water, Science, 331, 6016, pp. 450-453, 2011
            29. 2011: J. Oerlemans, Jan2011,Science Express Index “2500 Years of European Climate Variability and Human Susceptibility”
            30. 2012: F. C. Ljungqvist. et al., Northern Hemisphere temperature patterns in the last 12 centuries, Clim. Past, 8, 227-240, 2012
            31. 2012: R. Rohde, et al., A New Estimate of the Average Earth Surface Land Temperature Spanning 1753 to 2011, J. Geophys. Res.
            32. 2012:J. Gergis, et al., “Evidence of unusual late 20th century warming from an AUSTRALASIAN temperature reconstruction spanning the last millennium”, J. Climate
            33. 2012: T. Melvin, H. Grudd, K. R. Briffa, Potential bias in ‘updating’ tree-ring chronologies using regional curve standardisation: Re-processing 1500 years of Torneträsk density and ring-width data, Holocene, Oct. 26, 2012
            34. 2012: F. C. Ljungqvist, et al., Northern Hemisphere temperature patterns in the last 12 centuries, Clim. Past, 8, 227,240, 2012
            35. 2013: N. J. Abram, et al., Acceleration of snow melt in an Antarctic Peninsula ice core during the twentieth century, Nature Geosci., 6, 404-411 (see figs. 4 and 5)
            36. 2013: S. A. Marcott, et al., A Reconstruction of Regional and Global Temperature for the Past 11,300 Years, Science, 8, 339, 6124, 1198-1201

          • Stan

            The hockey stick broke, if you don’t know that, you don’t know anything.
            Even Briffa admits that.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            This buffoon is clueless about science and very proud of it’s stupidity.

          • Stan

            And yet it is you defending the discredited hockey stick.

            Don’t take my word for it, listen to what 100 climate scientists have to say about it:
            http://www.steynstore.com/product133.html

            “Do I expect you to publicly denounce the hockey stick as obvious drivel? Well, yes.”
            -Jonathan Jones, Professor of Atomic and Laser Physics, University of Oxford

            “Michael Mann, Phil Jones and Stefan Rahmstorf should be barred …because the scientific assessments in which they may take part are not credible anymore.”
            -Eduardo Zorita, Senior Scientist at Germany’s Institute for Coastal Research

            “Did Mann et al get it wrong? Yes, Mann et al got it wrong.”
            -Simon Tett, Professor of Climate Science, University of Edinburgh”

            And there are 97 more, and that’s just in the first edition.
            Enjoy your cult!

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            LOL … I gave you 36 peer-reviewed papers that support the Mann original there are now another six or more since I compiled that list. You have not even managed to find one. I don’t think you have a clue what a scientific citation is. No wonder you’re always on the losing end and reality passes you by.

          • Stan

            36 peer reviewed that are dated before his admission that it is garbage.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            LOL … you’re duped by what contrarian science-denying site?

          • Stan

            You’ve been duped by a fake hockey stick.
            Why did Mann hide his methods and data?
            Real scientists invite critiques, Mann hid from any investigation of his methods or his data.
            We all know why he was hiding it.
            Well, everyone but you knows why he was hiding it…..

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Cupcake if his methods and data were hidden how has it been replicated? You’re a very gullible and easily duped cretin. How many Nigerian 411 scammers have you fallen for?

          • Stan

            “Mr. McIntyre e-mailed Dr. Mann requesting the raw data used to build the
            hockey stick. After initially providing some information, Dr. Mann cut
            him off.”

            “Dr. Mann refuses to release it. “Giving them the algorithm would be
            giving in to the intimidation tactics that these people are engaged in,”
            he says.”

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            You were duped by searching for information to find peer-reviewed rebuttal of Mann. Withholding the algorithm is nothing nefarious and McIntyre compiled his own and got the same results so what’s your point?

          • Stan

            Withholding the data and the algorithm is clearly unscientific.
            Real science requires scrutiny, and McIntrye showed Mann’s work was garbage.
            Which is why the IPCC dumped him.

            He also lied about being a Nobel Prize winner, and was humiliated as he had to withdraw that claim as well.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Puerile vacuity.

          • Stan

            Nice try.
            Too bad you don’t understand the basic science or honesty.
            Maybe your cult should re-think it’s dogma.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            More puerile vacuity from an idiot whose never had a science class that he can remember.

            Q. Why can’t science-deniers understand the difference between science and religion/cults?A. Because they are uneducated nescient science-deniers, of course and it doesn’t push their prejudiced and non-scientific narrative devoid of evidence that requires belief.

  • Stan

    Climate change is like astrology:

    ” Japanese scientists have made a
    dramatic break with the UN and Western-backed hypothesis of climate
    change in a new report from its Energy Commission.

    Three of the five researchers disagree with the UN’s
    IPCC view that recent warming is primarily the consequence of man-made
    industrial emissions of greenhouse gases. Remarkably, the subtle and
    nuanced language typical in such reports has been set aside.

    One of the five contributors compares computer
    climate modelling to ancient astrology. Others castigate the paucity of
    the US ground temperature data set used to support the hypothesis, and
    declare that the unambiguous warming trend from the mid-part of the 20th
    Century has ceased.”

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/02/25/jstor_climate_report_translation/

    • Leftwithrightbrain

      I do find it amusing that people will produce and argue for results using data/information from secondary non-scientific sources, and have to be dragged kicking and screaming to the primary science sources. Why on earth wouldn’t you start with the primary sources in the first place if you want to discuss science? Maybe you just want to show that your prejudiced feelings are meaningless. Thanks for the heads up!

      • Stan

        The Japanese are a secondary source?
        Uh, no.

        • Leftwithrightbrain

          You’re a clueless cretin. You’re quoting theregister which is a secondary or possible even tertiary sorce.

          • Stan

            Wrong.
            Check with the Japanese.

            And my apologies for bursting your little social justice warrior bubble.
            Drink some hot chocolate and try not to cry yourself to sleep.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            You’re a very sad very gullible and easily duped cretin. Your life must suck … what a loser. Next thing you’ll tell us you voted for Romney.

          • Stan

            More deflection.
            When is the last time your AGW doomsday cult got anything right let alone a prediction?

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Stay on topic instead of deflecting … the quest here is to find out why you like being duped by secondary and tertiary non-scientific sources and avoid going to the primary sources? It is not possible to discuss any science with you because you don’t know what it states. All you know is what you’ve been duped into reading from spurious science-denying sources. Once you get the grasp of some science then maybe we can move on. Until then it is like trying to dialogue with mental patients.

          • Stan

            You’re in bad shape pal.
            Maybe these guys can help.

            http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2305&context=flr

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Maybe you link will help you get away from your science denying cult.

          • Stan

            Science is on my side.

          • Stan

            My side is supported by the science, you side is a cult with a belief system instead of science.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            True, we supply the meds you’re on but they’re not working very well!

          • Stan

            Ah, you poor bastard, you still think the hockey stick is valid.
            Such a shame, and a waste.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Neither you nor any of your science-denying ilk have shown that it is not whereas science shows it is solid theory. I’ll stick with what my colleagues know rather thanwhat some dumb, nescient, science-denying jerk on the internet spews.

          • Stan

            “When Messrs. McIntyre and McKitrick pointed this out to Nature, the
            journal that first published the hockey-stick graph, Dr. Mann and his
            two co-authors had to publish a partial correction. In it, they
            acknowledged one wrong date and the use of some tree-ring data that
            hadn’t been cited in the original paper, and they offered some new
            details of the statistical methods.”

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Old news and it didn’t change the data or the conclusions after Mann et al corrected the minor statistical calculation issues. That’s good science and how it should be done. So what’s your point?

          • Stan

            Old news?
            What does it matter if it is old when it is still right?

            Mann is a liar, he even claimed to be a Nobel Prize winner!
            He isn’t.

          • Stan

            Solid theory, that Mann admitted was wrong.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            You’re a perfidiously dumb conservative science-denying cünt stuck in stupidity and have been thoroughly eviscerated for your mendacious and outrageous comments.

          • Stan

            And you still can’t explain why all the AGW predictions are,….wait for it……WRONG.
            Even Mann and the IPCC admit they lied, but you repeat their lies like they are gospel.

            Leave the cult Junior, reality is not that scary!

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Stay on topic instead of deflecting … the quest here is to find out why you like being duped by secondary and tertiary non-scientific sources and avoid going to the primary sources? It is not possible to discuss any science with you because you don’t know what it states. All you know is what you’ve been duped into reading from spurious science-denying sources. Once you get the grasp of some science then maybe we can move on. Until then it is like trying to dialogue with mental patients.

            Q. Why can’t science-deniers understand the difference between science and religion/cult?A. Because they are uneducated nescient science-deniers, of course and it doesn’t push their prejudiced and non-scientific narrative devoid of evidence that requires belief.

          • Stan

            IPCC retracts warming predictions, admits they exaggerated..
            Look it up!

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Your hearsay is meaningless. If you had evidence you’d point to the IPCC reports and the relevant pages and paragraphs. A very simple task if your research was as thorough as you state it to be.

          • Stan

            More bad news for your cult, and good news for the planet.
            No AGW crisis is good news, right?

            “World’s top climate scientists confess: Global warming is just
            QUARTER what we thought – and computers got the effects of greenhouse
            gases wrong
            Leaked report reveals the world has warmed at quarter the rate claimed by IPCC in 2007

            Scientists accept their computers may have exaggerated

            Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2420783/Worlds-climate-scientists-confess-Global-warming-just-QUARTER-thought–computers-got-effects-greenhouse-gases-wrong.html#ixzz4Cw84kN1s

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            LOL … tabloids especially rightwing science-denying ones are not sources for science. I do find it amusing that people will produce and argue for results using data/information from secondary non-scientific sources, and have to be dragged kicking and screaming to the primary science sources. Why on earth wouldn’t you start with the primary sources in the first place if you want to discuss science? Maybe you just want to show that your prejudiced feelings are meaningless. Thanks for the heads up!

          • Stan

            Mann’s own words.

          • Leftwithrightbrain

            Crapola.

          • Stan

            Yes, Mann’s own words are crap, including his claims to be a Nobel Prize winner.

  • saggypants

    Solar winds are stronger with sun spots. when there are fewer spots there are less solar winds and that allows more cosmic rays to actually reach the earth. When cosmic rays reach the earth they cause clouds to form and cool the earth.

  • Kalasie Jones

    Another NASA image? A yellow dot? Graded like a PowerPoint background? Kinda like their blue dot? A dot. Like…a sticker you buy at the store. Ooohhh, pretty.

  • Stan
  • Jessica McFarlin

    <.
    ★✹:★✹:★✹:★✹:★✹:★✹:★✹:★✹:★✹:★✹:★✹:★✹:★✹:★✹:★✹:★✹:★✹:★✹:★✹:★✹:★✹:★✹:★✹::::::!w27nh:….,….

  • Stan

    “World’s top climate scientists confess: Global warming is just
    QUARTER what we thought – and computers got the effects of greenhouse
    gases wrong
    Leaked report reveals the world has warmed at quarter the rate claimed by IPCC in 2007

    Scientists accept their computers may have exaggerated”

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2420783/Worlds-climate-scientists-confess-Global-warming-just-QUARTER-thought–computers-got-effects-greenhouse-gases-wrong.html#ixzz4Cw84kN1s

  • iblowsheep

    Calm down people. The sun was just using samsung’s new selfie retouching phone.

    https://www.yahoo.com/beauty/blogger-calls-samsung-phones-default-213116150.html

  • BobT

    But the libs said global warming was on the rise and we’re all doomed unless we let them rule over us and tell us what’s good for us!!! Idiots and connivers all….

  • Admin Cat

    We are in a cooling trend.

  • FrankC

    If this is true, only Global Warming can save us. Otherwise we will have icebergs running rampant in the streets.