Myth 2 - Increasing earth temperature caused by solar activity

[scooterscot]

Whose winter?

woah is CH suggesting different seasons depending where you are in the world, imagine that...

[Churchill]

woah is CH suggesting different seasons depending where you are in the world, imagine that...

As a retort, that was rather lame. Haven't you got some tapes to change?

[scooterscot]

As a retort, that was rather lame. Haven't you got some tapes to change?

Someone has to separate the fact from the fairytale

I don't work in IT - mugs game

[Churchill]

Someone has to separate the fact from the fairytale

I don't work in IT - mugs game

Of course it is. Thanks for your (as usual) eloquent advice I'll start looking for a different job.

[scooterscot]

Of course it is. Thanks for your (as usual) eloquent advice I'll start looking for a different job.

This is not advice simply a proclamation...

[BlasterBates]

Just looked at the Wikipedia link you posted. It flat contradicts the increasing sunspot activity you claim from the start of the century:

"...only the 11 and 22 year cycles are clear in the observations..."

What do you mean sunspot activity was below 50 in 1900, it is now 75.

That is a 50% increase.



You didn't look at the graph you read the text.

The text is an unproven claim.

Yes they maybe right but if you LOOK AT THE GRAPH, then there is an increase in solar activity. That is even a website which supports your opnion. So I think its true.

QED

[sasguru]

What do you mean sunspot activity was below 50 in 1900, it is now 75.

That is a 50% increase.



You didn't look at the graph you read the text.

The text is an unproven claim.

Yes they maybe right but if you LOOK AT THE GRAPH, then there is an increase in solar activity. That is even a website which supports your opnion. So I think its true.

QED

Jeez. Are you from a polyversity?

The whole point of checking sunspot activity is to see if they correlate to temperature rises. The GRAPH shows that they clearly don't. Sunspot activity was also 75 in 1860 when temperatures were cool. On the other hand temperatures correlate closely with CO2, from the GRAPH.

[BlasterBates]

Jeez. Are you from a polyversity?

The whole point of checking sunspot activity is to see if they correlate to temperature rises. The GRAPH shows that they clearly don't. Sunspot activity was also 75 in 1860 when temperatures were cool. On the other hand temperatures correlate closely with CO2, from the GRAPH.

Not it wasn't, you haven't read the graph.

[shaunbhoy]

Not it wasn't, you haven't read the graph.

BB,
sasguru seldom "reads" anything. He just looks at the pictures. That is why he is drawn to this topic with its vast range of simplistic erroneous graphical nonsense. You have to admit though, it is comical to think of him frantically googling his way to his next deluded conclusion.

[sasguru]

BB,
sasguru seldom "reads" anything. He just looks at the pictures. That is why he is drawn to this topic with its vast range of simplistic erroneous graphical nonsense. You have to admit though, it is comical to think of him frantically googling his way to his next deluded conclusion.

You really are thick, aren't you? Good cannon fodder, but that's about it.