A general discussion on Climate Change

jmanley32 wrote:

amugs wrote:Cold in, Cold out, warm up then cold returns them warm up with a couple spatters of rain from a few cutters  with fronts drag through the region - so typical for Nov nowadays.

Right? I miss the days of cold, and the holiday feeling by now (granted this is a particularly different type of year for a whole other reason on many levels but just saying things have changed a lot since I was a kid.  I know the disrupt climate change causes but what else can explain this change? All I can remember as far back until about maybe 10-15 years ago was Nov cold, late Nov snow, snow till feb then the flowers started and the rare April snow happened. Now it's like winter is maybe 1 month long.

Jman you have to remember you and I and our back yards are nothing more than a mere grain of sand relative to the big picture.  It wont take much google searching to find that areas across the globe that were once tropical oceans are now barren deserts.  These deserts littered with fossils of ocean creatures are proof.  There are also currently cold climates with fossils of tropical vegetation indicating these areas were once vastly different as well.  Bottom line is the climates to various geographic locations(big and small) has shifted from warm(cold) and cold(warm), arid(moist) and moist(arid), etc. back and forth on the order of decades, centuries, millennia, and hundreds of millions of years.  

Unfortunately a political party has hijacked the climate discussion claiming one explanation as being 100% foregone truth based on "The science".  That same political faction has led one to believe that if you do not believe this one explanation then you are apparently a horrible person, who is a radical extremest and "a threat to democracy".   Problem with that is that science is ever evolving.  Science is built on "our best understanding" and is never 100%.  

The simple formula for climate change is:

man made influence + natural variability = Climate change

 For the most part the Natural Varibility portion of the equation has been a constant (solar irradiance =0.1%).  Meaning that any increase in CO2 and man made influence leads to a direct increase in how much climate changes; whereas, the changes in natural variability are so small that it still holds at about 0.1% of the total input.  With this is mind the man made global warmists can have all their math correct and think they have it figured out making it seem like man has this huge influence on the climate.  The problem is if you have half the equation incorrect, then the answer cannot be right and neither is "the science".  

The Natural variability portion of the equation has been horribly wrong.   Over the last 5-10years the realization that natural variability is nowhere near a constant has come to light in a big way.  The amount of information we are learning about this is expanding at an incredibly rate year after year.   This is no longer up for debate.    

Unfort in the USA due to a political institution taking over the distribution of information in both the news media and social media outlets, not just on climate change but on anything that does not fit the narrative, this sort of information will not be at the forefront of your living room any time soon.  Anything that does not fit the political agenda of a certain group apparently is now being censored by social outlets like Twitter and Facebook etc. and main stream news outlets alike (Facts).  But if you look for it you will see there is a tidal wave of information involving the solar as well as galactic influences on our system here on earth.  If you do a little searching for climate change on other planets in our solar system you will find a ton of information that the climates on other planets have been changing over the past century as well.  I doubt man made CO2 is affecting the climate on other planets, but I bet the sun does.  Again the minute there is any information to the CO2 contrary is brought up, it gets drowned out with cry's of you being a horrible soul less person.  But make no mistake it is out there from thousands of independent researches as well as at the top universities across the globe.        

Anyway to wrap up the answer to your question, look to the heavens my friend.  As you can see below colder periods globally have been seen after at least a a couple/few decades of low solar activity.  As you can also see we have reached what appears to be a new period of relative quiet solar activity the results of which should cause a cooling of the planet over the next 3-6 decades.  As you can see by the second image below since 1900 the solar cycles have been ramping up in intensity until its peak in the 1950's(also the dawn of the satellite era) where it has been slowly descending in activity since then.  Man made global warmists would point to the spike in CO2 and rise in global temps since the industrial revolution.  Ironically it also happens to be the longest stretch of, and modern maximum of, sunspot activity on the sun over the past 400 years.  Coincidentally us humans have caused a spike in CO2 and the temps have risen since the early 1900's (industrial revolution in the 1920's), but we have also been in the strongest period of sunspot activity in the past 400yrs. (Redundant on purpose)  




Why is the sunspot cycle so important?  First watch this brief video on what the "solar wind" is.  This is always affecting earth but to varying degrees on any given day.  Sunspots, however, can trigger solar flares/CME's, which is a massive amount of solar energy all at once.  





Look at the size of a solar flare relative to the size of the earth for some perspective:




The more sunspots the more solar flaring that occurs.  When an earth facing flare occurs(there are many different levels of flares) an incomprehensible amount of energy is thrown towards the planet.   Most people equate solar flares with geomagnetic storms and disruptions to our electronics, power grids etc., which is true.  Some of this energy is being deflected and absorbed by earths magnetic field, but what we are learning more and more about in the past decade is just how much of that energy is actually being taken into the earths global climate systems from the very top of the atmosphere all the way down to the surface including the vast oceans, both directly and indirectly.  The earths magnetic field is vitally important in protecting us from the harmful radiation from the solar wind, and these solar storms.  This is why astronauts need special space suits to shield from this radiation as well.  Problem is it is very well documented and researched that the magnetic field has been weakening over the 100yrs as well.  To add to it we are in the process of a magnetic pole reversal which coincides with a weakening in the earths magnetic field.  (feel free to google it).

Go here to learn more about solar flares:

https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/sunearth/news/X-class-flares.html

So not only have we been in a period of modern maximum sunspot cycles over the past 100+years, but earths shield from the suns influence has been weakening.  What that means is that more of the suns energy has been able to penetrate through earths magnetic shield and become a part of earths system both the atmospheric as well as the vast oceans systems, esp over the past 50yrs.  With a weaker shield a smaller flare might have more of an influence than if that same smaller flare happened say 200yrs ago with a more robust magnetic field.  Make sense?  

Does man have an influence on the planet?  Yes absolutely.  Should we do more to reduce greenhouse gases and pollution?  100%.  Is the debate on the cause of today's warmer global temps relative to what we insignificant humans think is normal over a time period that is nothing more than a grain of sand in time for our planet actually set in stone? NOPE...not even close.  So again you wont see much of these ideas being discussed in the main stream, because it does not fit the current narrative.  Take the red pill and unplug from the matrix so you can start to see the truth.  The truth is we still don't have all the answers.  Anyone that tells you otherwise is pushing an agenda.

SROC - most excellently explained!!
I do implore the member of this NJ Strong WX Family view the video I posted on David Dilley's presentation to the NJWO group this past Thursday - it is about 50 minutes and you'll see me ask a few questions. The Earth has and always will be in a state of flux - let's not forget the magnetic pole shift and it's influences on the planet - EQ, Volcanoes, Geomagnetic interferes and changes at the minute levels that humans cannot pick out or up BUT have big affects on Nature. Or the planetary alignment or the galactic sheet that we are learning about and it affects on our planet lately - 2023 we will have the square of big boy planets forming square around the earth - their magnetic pull/force we can not see but will feel as our plant has to deal with this.

So it is not linear but rather parabolic in nature of its flow. Dilley's research is very impressive and makes great sense but since he is against the narrative not only in the USA but by the Globalists (even tough most Holy in Christianity the Pope) have been harping on this. Science is never 100% nor will it ever be, it is to formulate questions and seek information to those questions.

What happens in our region has little bearing on the planet. have you seen how much record cold and snow out west and in the upper Midwest they have been experiencing the past 3 years> Or how about the tremendous snow building on Greenland that is record breaking? The Antarctic snow and ice was also record breaking as was teh cold and snow in Canada last year and looks to be again this year with Alaska joining the fray. What about the massive hail storms this year so far? In places that never saw such.
Has the planet warmed in teh last 25 years yes, but not as much as they projected not nearly. But is it due to man or is it a natural cycle, never bet against nature - she will find a balance. We are presently in the interglacial period = between two glacial periods. Just like the past millions of year - before the massive ice age that last 150milion years the planet was tropical - all over. Much warmer than today by far. Then we had a cataclysmic event hat change all that and sent us into a massive ice age. Then we had a medieval warm period and then after that into teh little ice age - did man warm the period for about 250 years in teh medieval time period?/ No and they (Globalists)WIL NEVER bring this up.

To our points some areas getting hammered while others not so much but will blame all on Clinate Change or Global Warming or CO2 or Man or.....
https://electroverse.net/u-s-snow-totals-1500-of-normal-in-some-parts/