Alec Rawls’s Recent Comments

• Click here to view comment in original post

  It is the sun

  Studies uniformly find the correlation between solar-magnetic activity and global temperature is .7 to .8, on all time scales, from the decadal to the millenial, going back 500 million years. Despite this nearly overwhelming evidence that the solar wind is the primary driver of global temperature, the IPCC omits solar-magnetic activity from their models entirely. As a result, the warming caused by "grand maximum" levels of solar activity from 1940-2000 gets misattributed to whatever correlated variables are in the IPCC's models. That is CO2, which grew over the same period. Take away this misattributed warming effect and changes in CO2 becomes a big nothing.

  Does anyone here really believe that if the Dalton Minimum happens again, or the Maunder minimum, the earth is not going to cool again? Do you live on a different planet than your ancestors? Will a grand solar minimum fail to cause cooling for the first time in 500 million years? Do you live in some fantasy world of hope and change?

  With the sun in a mildly extended solar minimum already, we might not have to wait long for an answer. Maybe some of you AGW believers would like to lay money? Given the solar quiescence we are already experiencing, I will bet $50 that the earth cools over the next three years.

  First four takers, non-anonymous. Buck buck BAWWWK. What about you Mr. Roberts? Care to put a week's pocket money where your mouth is?

  One of my posts on the IPCC's omitted variable fraud here.

  P.S. I've gotten almost no information from Inhofe, who is solid as a rock, but usually a bit behind the curve. I recommend Spencer, Singer, Svensmark, Michaels, and a host of other HONEST scientists, in contrast to the fraudsters at the IPCC.

  First four takers, plus Roberts, if he is willing.

  Alec Rawls
  Palo Alto CAOn The entire conservative media is informed on climate science by the office of James Inhofe posted 9 months, 2 weeks ago 23 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Ths sunspot-climate link known since 1700s

  Does 2 wheeler want some historical context? The last time the sun went into an extended funk we had the Little Ice Age, which coincided with the Maunder Minimum of sunspot activity. The very first econometric study, back in the 1800s, examined the solar-activity climate link, finding that when sunspot count was low, wheat prices were high (implying a poor growing season, with cloudy skies). In 1991 a couple of Danes got serious about doing statistical analyses of the solar cycle and climate and found a strong correlation between short-intense solar cycles and global warming, with longer less-intense cycles coinciding with global cooling. Since then the evidence has become overwhelming.

  So how do you jusfity the IPCC refusing to account any of this evidence AT ALL? Solar magnetic effects are not even in their model. That's how defrauded you all are. The IPCC misatributes solar warming effects to CO2, then multiplies the fraud by projecting this misattributed warming forward. It is a flat out lie, a 100% hoax, and you can EASILY determine this for yourself just by examining the evidence for the solar-climate connection that the IPCC refuses to account. Global warming is not just a religion. It is a religion of lies. On Poll shows more Americans do not believe global warming is result of man-made activity posted 10 months ago 14 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  The 4th IPCC is pure intellectual fraud

  The earth is rapidly cooling, and because solar-magnetic activity has dropped into a dormant phase of nobody knows what duration, it will continue to cool, probably for at least the next 20 years. The real danger is serious global cooling, and it always has been.

  Numerous studies have found a high degree of correlation (.7 to .8) between solar activity and global climate on all time scales, going back hundreds of millions of years. Solar activity was at "grand maximum" levels from 1940-2000. THAT is what caused the warming. From "grand maximum" there is nowhere to go but down. Cooling was inevitable, and with solar activity now suddenly down to rock bottom levels, it has already started.

  The 4th IPCC refuses to incorporate solar magnetic effects into their models on the grounds that they don't understand how it works. But that is not science. The scientific method is that data trumps theory. A scientist follows the facts. The IPCC's stand would be like a pre-Newtonian scientist predicting that, if he drops a rock, it will waft away on the wind, because he understands the wind pushing on an object, but he doesn't understand gravity, so he is not going to include it in his calculations. That is how scientific the IPCC is.

  Of course there are theories of how the solar-magnetic wind affects global temperature. The leading theory, from Henrik Svensmark, is that it sweeps away the high energy Galactic Cosmic Radiation that would otherwise ionize the atmosphere, seeding cloud formation. In effect, the solar wind blows the clouds away, giving the earth a sunburn. But the theory is secondary. Science is supposed to follow the facts, and the facts are clear: the solar wind is a, perhaps the, primary driver of global temperature. The IPCC is not science. It is religion.

  Anybody who really cares about the earth needs to chuck aside this fraudulent religion and start looking at the facts, because nothing is more devastating to flora and fauna than to be buried under a mile of ice, which is the real danger that we should be worried about, and doing whatever we can to forestall.

  Do you really want to be the last to know, figuring it out only when the frigid facts finally clobber you upside the head?  

  My post here:
  http://errortheory.blogspot.com/2008/11/my-comment-on-epa ...On Poll shows more Americans do not believe global warming is result of man-made activity posted 10 months ago 14 Responses