Go on then, tell us another one, Al



By now it should be readily apparent to anyone living in the northern latitudes with a pair of functioning eyes and the ability to feel cold that the drumbeat of predictions about the Great Manmade Global Warming Apocalypse were seriously exaggerated:
Professor Mike Lockwood from Reading University told the BBC that at the current rate of decline in solar activity, there is a risk that Northern Europe could become much colder and enter a new “Little Ice Age.” 
The “Little Ice Age” refers to a period during the 1600s when winters were harsh all across Europe. The cold weather that plagued the continent coincided with an inactive sun, called the Maunder solar minimum. 
Lockwood argues that during the late 20th century, the sun was unusually active, with the so-called “grand maximum” of solar activity occurring around 1985. But solar activity has decreased since then. 
“By looking back at certain isotopes in ice cores, [Lockwood] has been able to determine how active the sun has been over thousands of years,” The BBC reports.” Following analysis of the data, Professor Lockwood believes solar activity is now falling more rapidly than at any time in the last 10,000 years.” 
Based on these findings, Lockwood argues that there is an increased risk of a Maunder minimum; and a repeat of a “Dalton solar minimum,” which occurred in the early 1800s, is “more likely than not” to happen again. 
“He believes that we are already beginning to see a change in our climate — witness the colder winters and poor summers of recent years — and that over the next few decades there could be a slide to a new Maunder minimum,” BBC reports, adding that harsh winters and cooler summers would become more frequent. 
Lockwood’s research flies directly in the face of scientists who argue that human activities are causing the planet to heat up, commonly known as global warming. They argue that greenhouse gases, like carbon dioxide, trap heat in the planet, causing the Earth’s surface and oceans to warm.
It's pretty safe to argue that the "accepted scientific wisdom" is mostly wrong most of the time. Indeed, the combination of overweening arrogance and utter ignorance of history that one finds in much of the AGW side of this particular question is quite staggering. It is ironic indeed to hear proponents of the AGW camp constantly call us sceptics "flat-Earthers", in reference to an old trope about how it was supposedly accepted wisdom in the Middle Ages that the Earth was flat and not round; as it happens, that's complete BS. It is also vastly amusing to hear the same useful idiots that 40 years ago argued that the Earth was entering a Little Ice Age, now turning around and arguing that the world is getting too hot.

There are real, serious scientists out there doing real, serious investigations into the issues who have argued, for real and quite seriously, that there is nothing real or serious about anthropogenic global warming. Unfortunately, they aren't giving politicians the excuse to spend trillions of dollars of other people's money in some idiotic excuse to "correct income inequality" or "save the planet", or some such nonsense. This is precisely why they are being ignored, while the doomsday predictions of the alarmists are not.

Fortunately for us (and not for them), what is will always win out over what ought to be. Which means that, when we see the River Thames freeze solid in winter in the next 50 years or so, there will be no denying that Mankind's contribution to global temperatures is rather less consequential than that giant honking ball of raging thermonuclear fire in the sky.

Comments

  1. This is just more proof of climate change, you see. Now, where are those billions of dollars of tax-payers money to give to climatologists?

    Like Vox says: You don't need to know anything about science to understand human corruptibility.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS. Anonymous comments will be deleted.

Popular Posts