It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Scientists warn of unusually cold Sun: Will we face another ice age?

page: 2
30
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 9 2018 @ 11:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: BEBOG
a reply to: seasonal

Why do you think Al Gore went environmental when he really wasn't before being vice president? In that seat you get briefed the same as the president, the president however is commander in chief ahead of all military so thats where his focus sits as the vice president gets briefed on what threatens the nation from other sources and if the president goes down in line of duty, then the vice president is even more up to speed than both, then theres secretary of state which knows the vice presidents stuff and what the political climate is they move into that role then learn what the vice president did of the presidents affairs as now they are the new vice president...

compartmentalization do you think the entire eight years Gore was in office he was misbriefed on climate affairs? After office it struck him as so important he continued, as many do after leaving office. Obama has made it his mission with Mr. Holder to clean up districting and gerrymandering of voting so all states have fair voting and not a rigged map for better representation. This is why there is so much Russia collusion news to have a turn about face to the world stage in the broader threat to democracy than what those two are doing at home to work on this side of the borders issues... attacking it on both fronts...

Once one sees how government actually works it is not that complex... to many it isnt that complex anyway just argue and yell that your team is best and in such a manner you create that much needed smoke screen that hides issues that need to be addressed with a bunch of nonsense that doesnt help people actually see them... so no one really knows whats going on in the world affairs of politics that needs to be known... like here's Kim K's ass again as a distraction to what really matters, the lesson is: don't be Kim K's ass.


No yelling or screaming, and Gore sees $$$$$$$.




posted on Feb, 9 2018 @ 11:46 AM
link   
When you bring Al Gore into the argument, you are no longer trying to have a reasonable discussion, you are just trying to win the popular debate by trashing Al Gore while ignoring science.



posted on Feb, 9 2018 @ 11:49 AM
link   
a reply to: jrod

No, Al Gore has made outlandish claims that are obviously not true. But he is still the poster boy for all things climate science.

Ignoring science that doesn't meet the irrational needs of a profit center is a folly.



posted on Feb, 9 2018 @ 11:50 AM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

While all of these studies need to be viewed with a skeptic's eye at this point, it is ironic that, for many years at this point, skeptics and deniers of the AGW theory have been citing the sun's activity as the main driver of climactic temperature fluctuations.

Regardless, this would have never been published at SDSU, home of professors who think that farmer's markets are racist.



posted on Feb, 9 2018 @ 11:51 AM
link   
That moment when you realize ice ages are more common than what we imagined...



posted on Feb, 9 2018 @ 11:53 AM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

What credibility does Al Gore have a scientist?

His claims are worthless...but you guys want to believe if you attack Al Gore you win the climate debate.

edit on 9-2-2018 by jrod because: Typo gremlins



posted on Feb, 9 2018 @ 11:56 AM
link   
a reply to: jrod

Under a rock for the last couple of decades???? Al Gore is global warming, or climate change. Global cooling is going to spark off a turf war.



posted on Feb, 9 2018 @ 11:59 AM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

Also, this notion really isn't new, and it is corroborated. Here is an article from 11 months ago that cites that the sun's activity will have a cooling effect in coming decades as well:

For the first time, model calculations show a plausible way that fluctuations in solar activity could have a tangible impact on the climate. Studies funded by the Swiss National Science Foundation expect human-induced global warming to tail off slightly over the next few decades. A weaker sun could reduce temperatures by half a degree.

phys.org

Of course, the story makes sure that you still understand that AGW is a major issue, but at least it's acknowledging that the sun will have a relatively big effect on average global temperature. I mean, there has been about a 1.2-degree (Celsius) rise in average temperature in the past 100 years (source), so we're looking at about 41% of the past century of recorded temp increases being mitigated if this study's prediction is correct.

That's a pretty big amount, and if this turns out to be true, it might be a way to estimate how much of the past warming is attributable solely to the sun's activity as well.
edit on 9-2-2018 by SlapMonkey because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 9 2018 @ 11:59 AM
link   

edit on 9-2-2018 by SlapMonkey because: double post



posted on Feb, 9 2018 @ 12:02 PM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

Lets see who the deniers are, now...



posted on Feb, 9 2018 @ 12:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: smurfy
a reply to: seasonal

First off, just to look in the direction of the Sun, it's not hard to see how pale and insipid looking it has become these last decades or so, it used to be a warm yellow to red, now it's more like an LED bulb, and while I allow for atmosphere and pollution that can deepen the colour more so in some places than others.



This is so true.

This is so true.


edit on 9-2-2018 by Exitt because: .



posted on Feb, 9 2018 @ 12:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Thirty6BelowZero

Are you denying the Earth is experiencing a warming event? It is, the observations show this.

We are not cooling down...



posted on Feb, 9 2018 @ 12:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan
The sun's energy output is not constant over time. This has been known for years, but even today few appreciate the significance of it. Even among climate change scientists, who you would think would be the most aware of it.


Yeah but for the last decade they've been paid to send warnings of meltdowns and sailing across what used to be Wyoming, and they had to give the answers they were being paid for. Of course, any logical person already knew man wasn't responsible for the ever so minimal temp increase and that it was just part of the nature this planet has been seeing for billions of years.



posted on Feb, 9 2018 @ 12:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: lostbook
a reply to: seasonal

I read this article and was going to post it but you beat me to it. The funny part in all of this is that human activity, which is said to be warming the Earth, may actually save us from getting too cold if indeed there is a cool down.


The only way human activity could help us is if we found a way to stimulate all the volcanoes and even then I don't know how well that would work. Not even Al Gore in his private jumbo jet toodling around the world can save us from an ice age.



posted on Feb, 9 2018 @ 12:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grimpachi

originally posted by: ausername

originally posted by: Grimpachi
Not new. The Maunder Minimum has been known and predicted to occur for decades now. The prediction for when it will happen changes as the science becomes more refined and will probably change again in the future.


In other words they don't know what they don't know?


They know it will happen there is uncertainty of when it will happen.

It is like we know Yellowstone will erupt one day as for when it is still an educated guess. BTW they say it is overdue.


But it's only like saying that if we find some way to blame its eruption on mankind.



posted on Feb, 9 2018 @ 12:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Thirty6BelowZero

You are making this claim based on a biased story that claims we will an have an ice age by 2050....

Not a likely prediction but if it strokes your confirmation bias....
edit on 9-2-2018 by jrod because: T

edit on 9-2-2018 by jrod because: A



posted on Feb, 9 2018 @ 12:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: lostbook

It is perfectly right and high handed to 100% believe in climate change/global warming.

It is 100% bonkers to believe anything other than the media pushed profitable climate change/global warming.

You and I are bonkers.


Y'all aren't the only ones that are bonkers. Count me in.



posted on Feb, 9 2018 @ 12:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: seasonal

What credibility does Al Gore have a scientist?

His claims are worthless...but you guys want to believe if you attack Al Gore you win the climate debate.


Al Gore brought this whole thing to the surface. Why shouldn't he be attacked?



posted on Feb, 9 2018 @ 12:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: Thirty6BelowZero

Are you denying the Earth is experiencing a warming event? It is, the observations show this.

We are not cooling down...


A degree over several decades. Maybe the cooling will be just as long. I wouldn't mind going back to the warm summers I remember in the 80's and getting away from the hot summers I experience now, although the 100° days are dwindling over the past few years.



posted on Feb, 9 2018 @ 12:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: Thirty6BelowZero

You are making this claim based on a biased story that claims we will an have an ice age by 2050....

Not a likely prediction but if it strokes your confirmation bias....


Did I mention 2050 in my post or something? Why is this theory biased but AGW isn't? And I remember Al Gore warning us that the polar ice caps would be melted by 2005, then 2013, then it was realized that the amount of ice really hasn't changed at all.

If we were heading towards another ice age, it wouldn't be anything like the last ice age for hundreds of thousands of years. We may end up more like the climate of the 18th or 19th Century though in about 100 or more years. In our lifetimes, if true, then we'll be more like the mid to late 20th Century.



new topics

top topics



 
30
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join