Is the GRAND SOLAR MINIMUM the REAL driver of climate change?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 3 сер 2019
- In 2019 our sun was reaching the end of it's normal 11 year cycle and began approaching a period of minimum solar activity. This one was being dubbed the GRAND Solar Minimum. Some say the solar cycles are the real cause of climate change and that a Grand Solar Minimum is what is wreaking havoc with our weather systems in the early years of the 2020's and that it may even tip us into a mini ice age. So...what does the science say?
Video Transcripts available at our website
www.justhaveathink.com
Help support this channels independence at
/ justhaveathink
Or with a donation via Paypal by clicking here
www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr...
You can also help keep my brain ticking over during the long hours of research and editing via the nice folks at BuyMeACoffee.com
www.buymeacoffee.com/justhave...
Download the Just Have a Think App from the AppStore or Google Play
Interested in mastering and remembering the concepts that I present in my videos?
Check out the FREE DiveDeeper mini-courses offered by the Center for Behavior and Climate. These mini-courses teach the main concepts in select JHAT videos and go beyond to help you learn additional scientific or conservation concepts. The courses are great for teachers to use or for individual learning.
climatechange.behaviordevelop...
Check out other UA-cam Climate Communicators
zentouro:
/ zentouro
Climate Adam:
/ climateadam
Kurtis Baute:
/ scopeofscience
Levi Hildebrand:
/ the100lh
Simon Clark:
/ simonoxfphys
Sarah Karver:
/ @sarahkarver
ClimateTown:
/ @climatetown
Jack Harries:
/ jacksgap
Beckisphere:
/ @beckisphere
Our Changing Climate :
/ @ourchangingclimate
Research sites -
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo...
www.google.com/search?q=IPCC+...
www.realclimate.org/index.php/...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_c...
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...
slideplayer.com/slide/4490613/
spaceplace.nasa.gov/solar-cyc...
solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/Su...
solarcyclescience.com/forecast...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_m...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maunder...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiati...
www.pik-potsdam.de/~stefan/Pub...
skepticalscience.com/graphics...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_c...
earthobservatory.nasa.gov/ima...
spaceplace.nasa.gov/solar-cyc...
www.carbonbrief.org/why-the-s...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_c...
www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/sd...
news.agu.org/press-release/un...
#grandsolarminimum #solarcycles #sunspots
I don’t know why everyone is panicking. The government will come up with a new tax to fix it and life will continue on as normal.
🤣🤣🤣
Nice copy and past of a Exxon funded meme....
Do you morons realize what doing nothing cost?
It cost everything. Everything!!
See you in hell, morons.
@@Eidelmania Obama and Al Gore spend millions to live in sea side mansions that use more power than a third world village, fly private jets to so-called “Climate Summits” and keep telling us to lower our emissions or we’ll all die. If you want to live in fear of predictions ( like half of us were meant to be dead by 1985 and the sea levels were going to make the place look like a Kevin Costner movie) that’s fine, but the rest of us are sick of being lied to and forced to change our ways while the elites live it up.
My understanding was that President Biden proposed an increase gas tax to raise average prices from, then, $2/gal to 5. Perhaps the fuel industry has decided they want a dollar of that and raised it themselves to 3 before Biden and congress to 5. The idea of a higher tax is to force less gas use and thus less emissions.
@@alakablam7901 So because a few rich people (supposedly) don't practice what they preach, well then why should anyone else bother? What a stupid argument. They are insignificant on the entire world population.
Oh and
Al Gore's house had been made LEED-certified, earning credits in five categories. Apparently your source "forgot" to mention that. I can't find anything on Obama's mansion, and I'm pretty sure you never even bothered to look. And either you lied your ass off about those alleged climate predictions (cuz they're bullshit), or you are a gullible idiot talking nonsense.
2020 the year that just keeps giving
The years after will be more
Thank you 2020, may i have another?
@@batfink274 amen
Bring on the ice age!
justin 2020 is the year of VIRUS
I've been living in Texas and Oklahoma for well over 60 years. We've had hot years and cold years and floods, droughts, and storms -- as in exceptional storms. However, the weather and climate doesn't seem to be any different than it has been all my life. Variation from year to year, and decade to decade, but it doesn't seem any better or worse than it's always been.
We should probably look at what the climate has been since humans developed. That should give us a bracket for what we can live with. Doing that it does seem we are and have been in something of a sweet spot for global climate and it's understandable that we'd like to keep it, but it's the weather, so what you going to do?
Check out the work that's been done with Liquid salt cooled nuclear power reactors -- particularly the ones that can use Thorium. They can let us get rid of the fossil fuels, pull carbon from the atmosphere, desalinizate sea water, and burn existing nuclear waste as fuel.
The answer is more AND cleaner energy, and advancing technology and space travel to get resources without messing up the planet.
This guy is very nice and well spoken, but I'm suspicious that he's trying to push an agenda of poverty and low prosperity (except for the elites) and if you want to talk about disaster, then that's the path of doom. Make no mistake; we're going to go nuclear and exploit space resources eventually -- the question is do we do it now when we can go carefully and safely with as little environmental impact as possible, or wait until we have no choices, at the last minute, desperate and reckless of other long term consequences in a last ditch effort to avoid catastrophe?
Knowing people in general and guys like this in particular -- it's almost a certainty that it will be the latter.
Okay. Don't LIKE the nuclear way? Then let's do it till we can put up orbital power satellites and beam power back here. We have the ABILITY now to fix all of our non interpersonal issues, the question is do we have the balls to DO it.
Nice explanations and summary. Not sure why these twats always try to subtly weave in their small-minded thinking, in the form of Socialism/Communism - for us commoners, of course. I am actually concerned about the problem of climate change, but we have all of these polarized politicians pushing more division, so we get absolutely nowhere, or only a step forward.
So in order for me to keep my fleet of cars and two private jet, someone else needs to give up their carbon foot print for me.
Yes..preferably the family that saved for years to take a trip.
Done you can have mine 😉
@@brendn1264 Did you delete your other thread?
@@penguinuprighter6231 yeah not engaging. Too much hassle I can't be bothered arguing with close minded people. The main stream quackademics and their defence of mere ideas just isn't worth it. Let them off. Enjoy.
@@brendn1264 So you're a chicken and an idiot. Great combo.
NASA is ready to land on the surface of the sun, they just have to do it at night ;)
😂😂🤦🏽♀️
Great idea! I hope you told ‘em that before they took off.
Actually they're waiting for it to cool down before landing in it.
@Carl Henry lol..you got that right, the thinking by the left, Good one!!
@@Wil_Dsense Ha ha ha, right, and maybe in it dark side.
You left out earth’s weakening magnetic fields and the increase in cosmic rays
Hey I agree, scroll and find my comment if you agree electrical universe
@Gord Orvis actually uni means 1 and verse means statement. The masses believe in a statement issues by the 🇻🇦
@Gord Orvis go forth and learn my benefactor
Its not weakening, its shifting.
@@banpowel9784 by all accounts a slow solar wind speed is the reason how field lines are not compressed to block small wavelengths. Atmospheric compression also tends to favor better weather conditions due to a higher pressure zones and lower low pressure zones.
He is good at repeating concensus science.
Thank you, about TIME someone talked about thus! Am sharing this on my MeWe page!
"Consensus" is not science, in fact, it is antithetical to indiscriminate examination.
Consensus is arrived at when multiple lines of evidence all point in the same direction. Nobody is voting themselves into the club just to belong.
Your comment is "antithetical" to logical interpretation.
Science is about method and review.
Agreeing to believe or disbelieve in anything is about religion
there is no consensus anyway it was just four flawed surveys done by uni students lacking in science
@@oldman2800 Yeah perhaps old science. Being a scientist is about grant $$$ now. You do what needs to be done to make money.
I cringe every time someone uses Wikipedia as a reference...
Free Dom says:
"I cringe every time someone uses Wikipedia as a reference..."
==
Post the better source of reference.
I agree. Quote from the actual source
I do too
I use wiki quite often. It saves me and shitload of money buying comics😉
If you are discerning about what you accept as true, you can wade through the muck to find the nuggets.
There is an error in your calculation of the solar forcing. You divided the amount of forcing by 4 to account for the difference between the Earth's surface area and the actual area of solar irradiance it intercepts, but if you do this then you should also do the same for the irradiance figure of 1361 Wm^-2. The same applies for the albedo correction. Both corrections would apply equally to both the irradiance and forcing figure, meaning that including them makes no difference to the ratio you end up with.
The change in the forcing will simply be the ratio of the change in irradiance to the total irradiance - roughly 1/1361 = 0.07%. You'll note that the actual figure stated on the report you show at 9:10 is 0.05%, whereas you state it is 0.018%.
Take the professor in the back and plug him into the hyperdrive
Doesn't matter, solar irradiance is minuscule compared to the magnetic and electric fields that charge up the sun and the earth's atmosphere.
BFD
Just a thought... If GSM is predicting a mini ice age (and I've heard that since my college days in geology), it seems like having an increased atmosphere of CO2 heat may be beneficial in many ways. We just may need that shield of heat.
No one is predicting a mini ice age, except for some idiots. So no, it's not a good thing.
There is no mini ice age. A drop of a half a degree during a GSM will be noticed by exactly no one.
@@swiftlytiltingplanet8481 ...But a rise of half a degree will result in the end of life as we know it...
@@geekchameleon I love when people make things up so they'll have something to scoff at.
@@geekchameleon that's not what climate scientists are saying
Aliens. We need aliens to complete 2020.
The military gave us aliens earlier this year. We're missing the time travelers. Where's Marty?
Yeah I barely saw any UFO this year. They dissapeared on the last 5-10 years.
@@Blaishon UFOs don’t mean aliens simply unidentified flying objects... and the worse your are at actually identifying things the more UFOs you will see. Watch thunderf00ts series debunking these incidents “nasa ufo busted”
@@Toxic2T da. Cv19 lockdown.
They even control the f$%kin aliens now. Lol
@@stronghold500 Dunno if aliens, but the governments have something to do with them on our airspace.
With 270+ days in a row with no sunspots, we may be already in GSM.
Very cold and fall was almost hard core winter with freezes before Halloween in West Texas. Mild summer number 4 or 5 in row. I wore a jacket in beginning of june to walk my dog. NEVER ever needed a jacket in june in all of my 48 yrs.
@@davidwatson7919 yes I think the IPCC reports predicted more extreme weather events e.g. cold an apps will be colder and heat waves will be hotter , floods would be more extreme and cyclones more severe all because of increasing co2 above 400 parts per million now hasn't been this high for 200,000 years apparently
@@davidwatson7919 maybe u have a medical condition why you need a jacket in the summer. Its been a very mild winter in midwest
@@DD-yr6wc maybe because it windy overcast and in the 50s on a june morning?
And no sign of global cooling. 2019 was the second warmest year on record - the warmest non-El Nino year.
I didn't realise the solar cycle was only eleven years, that's peanuts in the scheme of things. Can you do one on the Milankovitch cycles please?
It’s prefect for us not to long but not to short
With CO2 at 400 + ppm the Milankovich cycle is pretty meaningless and lost in white noise. If CO2 levels were as high the last few million years as today we'd have never had ice ages .
@@haroldburrows4770 I believe we are slaves to them but I don't like being cold, perhaps extra CO2 is a good thing? What is CO2's saturation point? How many ppm?
It isn the time it takes for magnetic pulses from the poles to reach the equator and cancel each other out
@@bingpz What do you mean?
Loved the Watt explanation!! Absolutely helped me picture it better, never culd quite place it before. Brilliant videos. Thanks bunches.
Got to be careful of shrewd explanations with accurate lead ins that bend in a purposeful direction. This presentation is perfect propaganda. Well worth saving to see how to do it. Course if he didn’t blame it all on CO2 he wouldn’t be allowed to stay on line.
I'm gonna call bullshit on this. Too many assumptions for me and alot of others to be comfortable giving people I already don't trust more power and influence.
@Gord Orvis there are research papers you can look into that dive into the other types of energy and particles that come at us and the impact they have on our weather and climate. It is not to deny science or even climate change, but to look further into why it is happening. Though I have seen enough to make me question the narrative doesn't make me care about the planet less. I personally want better restrictions on pollution. From farms to produced goods, we are literally poisoning everything around us and killing other species in droves. As far as people's carbon footprint, we would do better in stopping consumerism. Teach people to be happy with themselves and not covet all the material bs we leave behind when we die.
@Gord Orvis The papers are invisible lol.
@Gord Orvis ua-cam.com/video/M_yqIj38UmY/v-deo.html
Grand Solar minimum is part of a much larger 400 year cycle not 11, please get the information correct.
I’m just starting to research this. Do you have some good resources you can point me to, please?
Not really, space and it's matter can change it's cycle when it wants to, just like you change your diet and lifestyle. Was you alive 400 years ago? Who did you get your source from? An ice lolly stick. Leave the guy alone and enjoy the video he made for entertainment. Go and look down your toilet for facts, there you will find your worth in how your seen and smelled.
First time I ever commented on music being too low to hear. Odd. I was just curious as to what the music playing in the background of your video is?
I can't find the transcripts on your website.
Finally, addressing this issue with science and not anecdotes.
Sounds more like psudoscience to me by ignoring other much larger sun effects than its irradiace!
@@landcruisingdoc4137 what are the larger effects of the sun?
@@landcruisingdoc4137 I'd give your opinions more credence if you provided some evidence- and if you'd managed to spell pseudoscience correctly! LMAO!
ttystikk rocks glad my missed e made you LYAO!! Check my main comments on the video for references.
Can you call providing only information that conforms to your point of view ....science. How about pointing out all the numerous forcing models have failed to accurately predict climate change, there is obviously something missing. Manipulating data doesn't melt Arctic Ice and last I checked nobody is taking a boat to the North Pole. It's also very peculiar that there is never mention of a cold weather record being broken... and don't forget more cosmic rays increase volcanic activity..... climate change is real alright but hardly understood
You failed to explain why the earth’s temperature was warmer several times in the last several thousand years, including 1,000 years ago. The Greenland ice cores also reveal that during every warm period, an increase in temps always proceeds an increase in carbon. Also, study the amount of carbon cause by human activity in relation to what naturally occurs.
1. The earth's temperature has not "warmer several times in the last several thousand years, including 1,000 years ago." That myth has been debunked many times, most recently by this comprehensive paper: www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1401-2
discussed here:
www.reuters.com/article/us-climatechange-study/global-warming-dwarfs-climate-variations-of-past-2000-years-study-idUSKCN1UJ2DC
2. "Greenland ice cores also reveal ..." So they do. So do Antarctic ice cores. What else would you expect? Surely you understand that - in the absence of a major change in CO2 sources such as anthropogenic emissions or major volcanic eruptions - warming the Earth should cause atmospheric CO2 to increase. So what?
3. As for "the amount of carbon cause by human activity in relation to what naturally occurs". Those same ice cores that you evidently trust (as you should) ALSO show that atmospheric CO2 was very stable until humans started emitting large amount of CO2 by burning fossil fuel, as shown by this graph:
scripps.ucsd.edu/programs/keelingcurve/wp-content/plugins/sio-bluemoon/graphs/co2_10k.png
Those human emissions have now increased atmospheric CO2 by nearly 50%. In other words the NET amount of carbon cause by human activity, currently around 50 billion tonnes per year, greatly exceeds natural emissions that are now actually NEGATIVE, since there is a net flow of carbon from the atmosphere to the oceans and terrestrial biosphere.
Funny these greenland ice sheets didnt melt away like they are now back then though, or you wouldnt have a recor...but...oh ya, your an idiot, i forgot. My bad. Bwahahahahaha
@@Tengooda Vikings lived on Greenland, and called it green-land. So it may well have been warmer and less ice there.
Don Fields - only the outside perimeter melted during the warming periods. Scientist are reporting that these glaciers have reversed course and have begun to expand in the last several years (Danish Meteorological Institute). Iceland glacier have also begun to grow, but only for one year.
Tengooda - you do realize that the same scientist were claiming these same climate cycles until well after 1992, using there own data. It was in 1992 that they admitted the need to get rid of these climate cycles, and so they did, without providing any justification for doing so. Listen to their own words!
Where can we get a updated version of this to see whats ahead for 2021
Nothing changes about this info in so short a time. Maybe check his library for current videos on a wide variety of climate related topics.
11 year cycles: Blizzards of 1966, 1977, heat wave in 1988, my car got stuck in a snow drift in my driveway in 1999.
Apparently you believe your backyard is the globe.
Zharkova has given a frightening explanation.
you don't see any of that in this video. Only TSI, nothing about the sun earth connection.
Not everyone in the science community agrees.
@@TheMrCougarful only the ones who are paid by geroge soros don't agree people with an agenda
@@Royelsworth That reptile gets everywhere !!!!
@Andy Theber If he were a physician with the same qualifications, would you go to him to treat your cancer? I don't care how good his bedside manner is I would not.
You forgot to mention plugging up all the active volcanos.....one good volcanic eruption puts out more green house gases than man ever thought of!
not true by a long shot
deniers keep spreading their lies
You obviously weren't alive when Mount St. Hellen's erupted back in 1980. It was the worst summer for triple digit heat I ever lived through in the Midwest. triple digits even through the night....but you can go on believing your lies!!!!
@@deathgatedeathstar9259
@@dogpatch5220
im sure it was awful
but in terms of emissions Vulcanos just doesnt come Close
www.scientificamerican.com/article/earthtalks-volcanoes-or-humans/
!According to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the world’s volcanoes, both on land and undersea, generate about 200 million tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) annually, while our automotive and industrial activities cause some 24 billion tons of CO2 emissions every year worldwide. Despite the arguments to the contrary, the facts speak for themselves: Greenhouse gas emissions from volcanoes comprise less than one percent of those generated by today’s human endeavors.!
www.nbcnews.com/id/6635776/ns/technology_and_science-science/t/mount-st-helens-top-washington-polluter/#.XV7hmnduKLQ
"Worldwide, sulfur dioxide emissions from volcanoes add up to about 15 million tons a year, compared to the 200 million tons produced by power plants and other human activities."
so no
No. Just No. As Deathgate Deathstars link in this thread shows it is miniscule compared to human emissions. In historic time, volcanic eruptions have caused significant disruptions in global temperature patterns -but that is on the downside (Tambora -1816 The year without Summer or Pinatubo 1991 -a one degree C drop in global temperatures for a couple of years). Even supervolcanoes in the distant past like Toba or Yellowstone only cools (albeit massively). It takes a flood basalt eruption to match the current volume of human emission of greenhouse gasses, but emissionwise they are nowhere near the PACE of human activity. The Siberian Traps eruption (252 mya ago) or The Deccan traps (66 mya) were CONTNENTAL-wide events that unfolded for MILLENIA! On some info on REALLY BAD volcanic eruptions: ua-cam.com/video/st_2C_Wrw4A/v-deo.html
@@madshagen5849 I pointed out to him that he probably wasn't alive when Mt. St. Helens erupted, I live 1800 miles away from it and we had the hottest summer ever in my 67 years...triple digits through the night.
Thank you. I will be sharing this. Nice work.
4:26 It looks like the sun is sticking its tongue out at us. :p
I worked at PMOD WRC where you got that data from, admittedly micro-cycle solar changes over the 4 or even 11 year cycle does not contribute much more than excessive heat waves or snowy winters. But long term macro cycles are directly responsible for the descent into Ice ages. The predominant state of the Earth has been Ice age, we are currently in an inter-glacial period that will be ended by an Ice age caused by Solar long macro cycle changes. If we have manged to stop the Ice age cycle we should rejoice, because our race will not have to endure 90k years of the next one. We have not stopped the Solar induced Ice age cycle, the next one will probably wipe us out.
All we can hope is people like you figure out ways to save us as guys like the video producers are catatonic in fear unable to function.
@@michaelmilne9914 it’s more than likely that nothing memorable will occur in our lifetimes
@@jk28416 Yea I know, its just I get a little POed at these SIMP types who seem to have to make up for that fact with pseudo intelligent fantasies designed to make us cower so they can feel good about being a SIMP
Debbie downer, we're here now in spite of all the ice ages right? And we were certainly here and flourishing at the end of the last ice age, though whatever coincided with that end definitely cut us back quite a bit
@@ven11235 well yes, we are more equipped now, but the thing is humans have been just as intelligent 100k years ago as we are today but it took 90k years of arsing around before we invented the wheel and fire. you'd think you'd invent fire pretty quickly in the ice age!
When talking about the "Little ice age" starting 50 years before the Maunder, you failed to note the Wolf and Spörer Minimum. The Wolf wasn't a big one but the Spörer was. Not as deep as the Maunder, but it lasted a lot longer.
Mr mesmerised can you back me up in my comments above with swiftly tilting planet and get others to do so. We have had a gutsful of the rheteric and narrative of man causing weather when it is the sun. With their debunked fraudulent reports that they use to debunk science with to keep the scam going why we ate robbed of carbon tax. GSM is here now, finished them.
@@davidwilliams-xt7pe I will not back you, because you are wrong. For the past 60 years the Sun's activity went from a "grand" maximum to a minimum in (roughly) a 155 year cycle. If it's all about the Sun... we should have had global cooling since the early 1960's. The exact opposite happened. Oops.
"swiftly tilting planet" -- That is just wrong on every level. The planet itself is not "swiftly" tilting, it's the magnetic north pole that's on the move. And it's not tilting, but the exact opposite: it's moving towards the geographical north pole. Thirdly. I am quite certain you have absolutely no idea why this shift supposed to be relevant for your claim. Check the trajectory of the magnetic northpole over the past millennium and cross reference it with cold or warm periods (you never did that, right?) and you get an idea of how little relevance it has to your claim.
"With their debunked fraudulent reports" -- I get the feeling you never fact-checked those alleged "debunkings". And how can you even tell what's science and what's fraud? In just a few lines with superficial catch words and claims, you already made some very simple, bad mistakes.
"with to keep the scam going why we ate robbed of carbon tax" -- Even if the carbon tax is misguided, that doesn't make the science wrong. Bad argument.
"GSM is here now, finished them" -- I repeat... despite this... there's still global warming, not global cooling. Good luck explaining that away
@@MrMezmerized there is no warming, temperature has been fairly steady.
In The 70's we had global cooling 80's global warming today the liars come out with so called Climate Change all hoaxes for money and power to the rulling elite mostly within a certain political party. Eugenicists! Hold your own breath Patriots will rise up and peacefully stand strong!
@@kyrnsword72 yes. Agree. Make some comments to swiftly tilting planet above in comments section in support of me. We must attack these criminals so others can see comments and prepare for grand solar minimum we are going into now.
Brilliant. This is very good. Can’t believe I have only just found you. This is almost potholer standard researched.
Im intrigued! TY so much 4 sharing
The GSM proponents I’m aware of aren’t concerned with waning thermal output from the Sun, but the diminishing of its magnetic field which they claim shields us from cosmic ray bombardment. They’re basically claiming that when cosmic rays pass through Earth, they agitate silicates in magma, resulting in more volcanism to the degree where massive ash clouds cool the our planet. Additionally, they claim that cosmic rays increase cloud nucleation and hence, the size and ferocity of storms. Both of these phenomena take a toll on crop production to the degree that civilizations are in put in jeopardy. Please address these claims in another presentation. Thanks!
electroverse.net/new-scientific-study-finds-we-could-be-entering-the-next-grand-solar-minimum/
Yah Gord O .... We are making up FACTS. LOL
Kiss yer flyspeck CO2 GloBULL warming BYE. ROFL OMG HILARIOUS.
@Gord Orvis ... Your CO2 QUACKERY THEORY is looking more and more STUPID every day now. LOL
Well the volcano claims are basically guess work.. They are basing it on a short paper showing some possible correlation between solar activity and some big vulcanic eruptions... The paper does not address the correlation between solar activity and global temperatures... And those are important for crop production... Because there is none...
There's more to the sun's influence other than irradiance.
There seem to be many dozens of variables from solar forcing. They look at just one in irradiance. Lol
@@jackpleb2360 Suspicious0bservers did a good breakdown of the additional solar forcing factors
Mike Peacock the moment they ignore water vapor as by far the most significant greenhouse gas I know they have an agenda.
Just for fun.... try asking any of these so-called experts what the 'right amount' of C02 should be.
Aren't you paying attention!? It's all down to folks like you leaving your phone charger plugged in too long. Unplug it right now so I'll have 11 years left to live before mankind self destructs instead of 10
Would be interested in thoughts on volcanic activity during a Grand Solar Minimum, especially with regards to Co2 output.
The volcanoes are still responsible for 99% of emissions regardless of the solar minimum or maximum.
You are right on topic. Lot left out here only to shrewdly promote global warming, Oops climate change.
@@brianfitch5469 At the moment, volcanoes are responsible for only 1% of the CO2 emissions coming from humanity.
@@kevinpils4716 not in the slightest. Humans barely make a dent in what is released. It's not even disputed by the most hardcore climate people. The only thing they don't agree upon with the majority is that instead of 99% the most hardcore brainwashed climate people say that volcanoes put out 96- 97% of all emissions. Volcanoes don't have to be erupting to be spewing out hundreds of tons of gases.
Further more over the last twenty years the earth has greened over 5% this is area large then the Amazon rainforest. Look at the satellite image photos. With this came evapotranspiration, which is why the term changed from global warming to climate change. As the earth greened with higher CO2 levels it's cooled half a degree worldwide. Which is why the name changed. Your not told about this on mainstream media. They have to keep the trillions in tax money and the cost of energy high. As CO2 levels rise we will continue to see the earth get greener. CO2 is plant food, look at the difference CO2 makes in green houses. You can grow grapes the size of apples pumping co2 into a green house. When co2 levels reach 1000ppm hopefully in the next few hundred years deserts will complete turn back green again. The 5% turning more green is areas encroaching on desert areas taking it back. As CO2 levels make plants drought resistant. They lose less water to for photosynthesis.
@@brianfitch5469 I would love to see a peer-reviewed study that validates your claim.
When was the last significant solar minimum?
This is a direct result of Daylight Savings Time.
No. Metric Time. They never should have switched to Metric Time. Greenwich Mean Time always did the job.
How does this only have 30 likes?
@@KetOMAD Because people dont believe him ? He is trying to blame it all on man made CO2 , and at 0.042% its unlikely he is correct , add to that the fact that out of 31 units of CO2 released to the atmosphere only 1 was man made. Yes thats right the 96% of CO2 released was completely natural , and the 4% ( that I have rounded up from 3% ) was man made. we could bomb our economies back to zero CO2 emissions and it would hardly make any difference.
🤣🤣😆😆😆
@@budbud2509 Exactly. Who is this guy, who pays him? Where does he get his information from?
Over the last thousand years, we've always had drastic changes in weather around the planet. Remember that Greenland was once a land of beautiful, green pastures. We know this because everywhere we've cut into the ice, a few feet below we find residues of those grasses.
In North America, the 1920s and `30s produced some absolutely horrible weather. Claiming that today's weather is so much worse than ever before is nothing short of a huge lie.
Something else this gentleman and other Warmers do constantly, which is a common argumentative fallacy, is to take what they see as a terrible and tragic event that occurs in one tiny part of the planet, and they extrapolate that into the entire planet, as if the exact same thing is happening all over the planet-when it is not!
It's akin to walking out your backdoor after a rain storm and the yard is muddy and puddles are everywhere, and then saying, Wow, the whole planet is one big mud puddle. (The man in the video above did exactly this by pointing out what he sees as terribly tragic weather in the middle of the US., and then, of course, tying that into "global warming." The extrapolation fallacy.)
Some do this because they're ignorant (local weather people, for example), but those who are the most strongly promoting "global warming" know exactly what they're doing. And they do it to deceive a public-school educated populace, who have no understanding of argument or how to keep these devious bastards from deceiving them into believing that they need the Warmers to help them survive and to save them from the doom and disaster they claim is about to come on them. And in order for these scammers to save them, the people must give the Warmers and their politicians more power over them to control them. Nice coincidence, is it not?
Here is some evidence proving how the Warmers purposely deceive the people, and the information will help folks keep them from conning them. This is only a scant tidbit of what these relentless deceivers do.
Tony Heller Exposes How the Scamming Warmers Deceive the Public, the Politicians,
Scientists, and Academics into Believing the Seas are Rising, the Earth is about to Boil Over-and That Humans are the Cause of these Phony Claims (12:50)
ua-cam.com/video/8455KEDitpU/v-deo.html
lilly bloom very well said 🙏🏼
Yes, it is very important for us to remember the 1930s Dust Bowl era and how hot it was back then. I'm not sure I agree with Tony that it was hotter then than now. Assuming that the journalists and what not exaggerated a bit back then as now, it may be that the temps are about the same in the 2010s as they have been then in the 30s. That's still something noteworthy though, since CO2 levels were lower back in the 1930s.
You mean because we've had changes in the weather in the past means that it won't be expensive when Florida floods out? Oh, okay. Thanks for that info, trumpie.
@@michelangelobuonarroti916, who even mentioned Trump in this thread? Now, as it concerns Florida, we have more to worry about storm surge from hurricanes than aggregate sea level rise from global warming, in the near future. Folks thought that the Maldives would have been underwater by now due to aggregate sea level rise from global warming, but the Maldives are (as of 2019) still with us.
Not sure you're with us, @@michelangelobuonarroti916. Perhaps where you are there is a placed named Florida that is "flooding out." But the Florida where I am is healthy and the sea levels are steady. I don't think it would hurt you if you would take a long, serious look at the video I provided. You might return to the same planet that the rest of us are on.
CO2 only reflects a narrow spectrum of light. A little bit of water vapor interferes with this spectrum. As such a massive increase of CO2 would have little effect on our climate.
Correct ! It’s time to start talking about global cooling ! The influence of human CO2 emissions on global temperatures is so insignificant that we may as well move on to resolve real problems on this planet !
Giorgio Cooper says:
"Correct ! It’s time to start talking about global cooling ! .."
==
There's no sign of cooling.
Where did you find it?
assets.climatecentral.org/images/made/2017HottestOnRecord_TopTen_en_title_lg_900_506_s_c1_c_c.jpg
@Giorgio - You mean the influence of all the heads of each country raping our land for all it's resources, Their factories, and waste disposal of their factories. Humans have a very small effect on this but that is what they want you to believe.
People who put a space on both sides of punctuation are either ill-educated or overly dramatic ! ! ! !
@@@IShallNotBeSilent Well then, YOU are part of the problem since you use said products (unless you posted here by pencil and paper), use electricity (most of which is generated by fossil fuels), eat (unless you grow and harvest your own food), and defecate (unless you shit in a hole you dug).
So . . . FOAD already. Oh, and STFU too.
@@barrywilliams991 says:
"use electricity (most of which is generated by fossil fuels), "
==
Because the fossil fuel industry isn't giving it up.
Not because it's what the people want.
Solar, wind power energies are actually cheaper already and will be even cheaper in the future.
How long are you willing to pay for the higher cost for the electricity knowing somebody paying politicians to keep it high?
www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&ei=KZlpXfCvDsyctAWDmIPICA&q=renewable+energy+cost+less+than+fossil+energy&oq=renewable+energy+cost+less+than+fossil+energy&gs_l=psy-ab.3..33i22i29i30.23517.29092..30958...0.2..0.287.1398.0j6j2......0....1..gws-wiz.......0i71j35i39j33i160.Gva02gehhNY&ved=0ahUKEwiw6LXqyKvkAhVMDq0KHQPMAIkQ4dUDCAs&uact=5
You didn't know this?
Turn the sun off and then you'll see just how impactful it is ;)
Exactly, and no one either believes, wants to hear, wants to talk about nor wants to PREPARE, ESPECIALLY People with KIDS and GRANDKIDS!!!
It's a EXTREMELY DIRE SITUATION and FEELING, and their NARCISSISM and EGOS WON'T Change Until Kids and Grandkids Struggle and Rage at their FOOLISHNESS of Not PREPARING them WHEN They Had the CHANCE.🤔💭😳🤯🤬😭😵
😬OHH THE HORRORS!!!😱
Other comments about yours show just how unbelievably dumb most people are. They don't even get that if the sun went away then that alone would end all life here. Everything is dead without the sun. They seem to think of the poles shifted or CO2 levels rose astronomically or sea level rise by a foot or twenty meters but the sun still shone as usual it would destroy all life and destroy the planet. They can't grasp the fact that the sun is why anything and everything lives, has lived or will live and without it nothing lives or will live.
@@OverTaxed42Long Nobody has the slightest doubt that if the sun "turned off", then we would all rapidly perish.
But since that has not the slightest chance of happening, there is little point in worrying about it, or allowing such a possibility to distract us from the very real dangers of global heating.
Even NASA has quietly announced that Solar Cycle 25 will have fewer sunspots than any other in the last 200 years. Prepare for a Year Without Summer like 1816.
@@traditionalfood367 The 1816 Year Without Summer was mainly caused by the eruption of Tambora (Indonesia), and possibly also other volcanic eruptions earlier. There were widespread reports of haze or fog obscuring the sun. Large volcanic eruptions blast both volcanic ash and sulphate aerosols into the atmosphere which reflect sunlight back into space and reduce global temperatures.
The summer of 1816 was actually just after the maximum point (March 1816) of the sunspot cycle 6 that started in c.Jul 1810 and ended in c.Apr 1823, although this was in an overall period of lower solar activity known as the Dalton Minimum.
Average global temperatures are already well over 1degC warmer than during the Dalton Minimum, and there is no known prospect of a large volcanic eruption (though these are largely unpredictable), so there is no reason to predict a similar "year without a summer" is imminent.
The number 11. Hmm, is there a link to the mathematical number 11 base used in the great pyramid?
11 is an average. Did the pyramid builders use averages and approximations?
Valuable and interesting presentation! One minor MISTAKE in the video at 9:43: Black Carbon is properly depicted with a warming effect on the chart (dark grey), while the video author accidentally reads it out as an example of a 'cooling effect'.
I remember papers saying smoking did not cause health issues.
Yeah and raising cigarette taxes for the umpteenth time will lower health care costs associated with damages caused by smoking .
I remember the food pyramid encouraging us to up our carbs.
@@CornerTalker read my current post.
Yeah, something about the jab now having a Heart Surgeons Warning message on it for youthful men. Just like smokes.
@@metaljacket866 Cig taxes fund medicare. So when the 2025 renegotiation comes, the vaping has been demonized enough so that too will be included into the settlement. Hence why smoking traditional cigs is encourage and vaping been demonized. Plus smoking weed, heck doing that makes you a heart and lung hero???? what the heck!
Blame the Sun or blame yourselves either way you need to learn some personal survival skills Community survival skills just saying
By far, the BEST hedge is an abundance of low cost reliable energy and that is what the IPCC and others do NOT want. Being prepared is a great idea.
Tulsa Fox- Everybody needs to learn to farm and garden for themselves and this guy is a NWO probably paid-off liar.
Also known as a shill. Bald head and all.
That is so true. What generations before 1950 considered common sense behavior: storing food, extra blankets and being self-sufficient is now called "prepping" and criticized for being extreme. Granted the critics go to the grocery store for their protein.
Tulsa Fox says:
"need to learn some personal survival skills Community survival skills just saying"
==
Rising temperature will continue hundreds if not thousands of years.
While you can be dead in two weeks without food from agricultural failure from climate change.
How are you going to survive that?
Hunt wild animals, while millions trying to do the name?
What kind of survival skill do you have?
Do you know what will be most helpful skill?
Know how to cook human flesh.
That would be the only thing plentiful around you, at least for a while.
You'll find out what your son or daughter, or mother taste like.
Hi, Would you check out what Dr Scott McIntosh has to say about solar cycles and in particular No. 25. Love to have your thoughts
What does he have to say?
He says we will have a cycle in the mid 200s about twice as big as the last one. The rate at which SC25 is building - I am inclined to agree with him!
The ice age ended twelve thousand years ago during the Pleistocene Epoch because of the warming sun. At that remote time, mankind was not using fossil fuels. Something to think about.
No it should have but we still have polar ice caps! In a true Halocane period ther is no year round ice on Earth
When the Climate Banking System was announced, the game was up.
Follow the money
Major fossil fuel companies have known for decades that their products-oil, natural gas, and coal-cause global warming. Their own scientists told them so more than 30 years ago.
In response, they decided to deceive shareholders, politicians, and the public-you!-about the facts and risks of global warming. Follow the money you say, 5.2 trillion was spent globally on fossil fuel subsidies in 2017.
@@jammer6524 they are the same crowd.
Green energy, carbon tax and fossil fuels.
They manipulate the narrative.
Remember the great global cooling scam?
@@leproboscis8767 In the scientific papers of the 1970's which considered climate trends of the 21st century, less than 10% inclined towards future cooling, while most papers predicted future warming. Science News in May 1959 forecast a 25% increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide in the 150 years from 1850 to 2000, with a consequent warming trend.[3] The actual increase in this period was 29%. Paul R. Ehrlich mentioned climate change from greenhouse gases in 1968.
For the most part global cooling was NOT a thing scientist of the time were worried about. Exxon knew about climate change 40 years ago but decided to spend billion on a massive misinformation campaign . You took the bait hook line and snicker .
@@jammer6524
To suggest an increase of 29% CO2 is going to lead to our extinction is down right criminal.
So 400 ppm becomes 516 ppm
Fuck we're doomed!!!
Where is the rest of the science explaining the change in water vapor levels and its effect on the climate.
This science is selective and incomplete
I appreciate you are concerned, but you are the one who has been scammed by the Global Banking System.
You know, the ones behind war, terrorism, the counterfeit central bank money and anything else to take away our liberty and steal our wealth.
Al Gore’s buddies all got well involved in the carbon credit scheme .
Nice explanation of the workings of the Sun, but perhaps its electrical and that oscillating wave amplitude explains the solar cycles. The wild card is the volcanic eruptions during GSM's usually in the VEI 7 range, which would result in a cooling planet, not from the TSI decreases. Best example Late Antique Little Ice Age (LAIA).
@Gord Orvis Telling people that you can control the weather and climate of Earth by controlling CO2 is misinformation!
Thanks David for pointing this out
Some dumb shit here. You will never catch up to Ben, but keep trying.
I was looking for a comment, which mention David Dubyne....
How much of total ghg are man made? And whats the precentage of co2 out of all ghgs?
I love all of your videos. Could you please also make one about the milankovich cycles vs climate change?
Be sure to note the different time scales. How long the tiny Milankovitch-Cycle forcing takes to affect the Earth's climate. Hint: longer than written history.
Haha all these indoctrinated kids dont remember 6to14ft of snow every Christmas and rarely more than 2to3 weeks summer pmsl
for real
When my mom was a kid in Iowa they had snow to the roof tops. My mom was born in 1928.
Snow is a local daily weather phenomenon. climate is average weather measured over decades. So you snowfall is irrelevant
@@drkstrong And Greenland was ice free but full of Vikings! How far back should we go? By the way co2 was estimated to be under 200ppm. and during a very cold snap it was est. over 1,000ppm? makes no sense right? just like this bull.
@@sedigives "And Greenland was ice free but full of Vikings!" - 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
And the creator of this channel states this channel is not about the climate debate.Could have fooled me.
I think he forgot about convection
I would think that precession and eccentricity would also play a huge role. Climate scientists seem to rely on 3 things. Solar cycle, co2, and people. There are so many more variables that should be studied before anyone blames just people. Since there's no possible way to have repeatable experiments to prove one way or the other, climate science is stuck in a perpetual state of hypothesis. By definition, that means educated guesses. Based on that, anyone who says it's fact is lying. Just my thoughts.
There's a saying, "Necessity is the Mother of Invention". I'm seeing a big push to clean up the environment again. Of course, I remember in the late 60's and 70's the same ideals were being pushed. My biology teacher talked about global warming when I was in high school in 1975. The original electric cars were 1st used before combustion engines were invented. We'll get there, I have faith in people.
I have no faith in humans,but I have faith in humankind ,we will get there .
Where does volcanic activity and plate movements fit in the puzzle?
Causes ice ages.
Its like a control system. If planet earth gets too hot, clouds form more, reflect more sunlight away AND wash out greenhouse gases which get trapped, eventually as rocks/corals. When it gets too cold eventually greenhouse gases from volcanoes and subduction of tectonic plates build up warming the planet again. Pretty good control system. Been working well for 3.5 Billion years at least. Mars went cold because it lost its tectonic activity (no out gassing) and venus lost its hydrogen (near the sun and so hydrogen could be expelled from upper atmosphere; and therefore lost its water) so it went hot.
And it doesn't explain why all the planets are having weather changes...!
Every planet experiences changes in orbit and axial tilt, which can affect climate.
People have got to wake up !! We are not only warming OUR planet but Mars as well !!
We have totally screwed up Mars ice caps as well over the last 30 years!
Haha 😂 lmao
What????lol
rftulak++++ Wow, you sound so serious to be so hilarious. Oh, the neighbor went to his outhouse after eating too much chili and beans and the planet Jupiter had a melt down by the red spot!!#
Yeah, Mars temperature is totally ignored at this point....and will be until someone comes up with a theory to make screwed up models to prove it's our fault unless we all become hunter gatherers again, except for the elite that will save us all
Boom!
Solar minimum and maximum correlate very closely with the relative orbits of Saturn and Jupiter, which have an approximate 11-year period between when they're on opposite sides of the Sun, and then on the same side.
Jupiter needs about 12 years for an orbit, Saturn 30 years. No way to extract a 11 years cycle from this.
@@norbertjendruschj9121 You are mistaken. Look at your math again, and understand how it relates to RELATIVE positions of the two planets.
@@vanessajazp6341 Sancta simplicitas. Correcting a mistake is a sign of intelligence, insisting on a mistake a sign of, well, you know.
Unlikely that a GSM will cause a “mini ice age” as explained in the video. Thank you for this.
We are at the bottom of a solar cycle yet 2020 tied 2016 as the hottest year on record. So a future hot house is our concern as the power of a huge increase in greenhouse gases in our atmosphere will dramatically override any slight decrease in solar irradiance.
Also for those in the comments cold weather does not mean global warming isn’t real. Weather =/= climate, regional =/= global.
Solar cycle 25, off to a strong start, thanks you for your support.
@@penguinuprighter6231 Solar Cycle 25?
@@PremierCCGuyMMXVI Just agreeing that there is no GSM.
@@penguinuprighter6231 oh, well we are in a GSM but it won’t have any effect
@@PremierCCGuyMMXVI Sorry, we are in a normal 11 year cycle. A GSM is a decades long period of very low or no sunspot activity. There is no evidence of this.
It's strange how this video is in my recommendations every day when I watched it a month ago.
Google wants you to eat this up quickly. And they also don't want you to learn about solar particles (hundreds of millions of times more powerful drivers of weather than the CO2) and solar magnetic fields.
@Gord Orvis I doubt it's Google as a company, but a few key decision makers carefully placed at the top.
@Gord Orvis suspicious0bservers.org/
@Gord Orvis zero dollars.
@Gord Orvis no, WTF?
Human activity is blamed to give us a sense of control (hope). All we can do is prepare to mitigate the effects.
No, sorry that's wrong, we did it. However we are pretty much to mitigation at this point.
@Truth that, too
Well... You could pray about it. Only a fool would believe that humans can do whatever the F$#K they like without it having consequences.
@@tim1883 Yeah we killed those poor dinosaurs too! Damn those humans and their climate changing activities! They've caused so much damage to the climate that our CO2 went back in time and ended the Ice Age!
@@Mephilis78 An asteroid killed the non-avian dinosaurs. Your response makes me sad that so many are so science illiterate. What you say is like peeps stating that evolution is JUST a theory. You do not know enough to realize how focking stupid what you say is. Dunning-Kruger Effect.
It is the 21.06.2021 in north portugal and we have right now at 11:45 am, only 13°C
normaly around this time of the year, we have burning 30°C to 40°C in the day.
Also in the summer it never rains. There is a deffenet strong dry season and forest fires are an issue every year.
Its been grey and cloudy for at least a week and longer. Also it rains multiple times everyday basicly. if not day, then in the night.
Also we had storm like winds. very strong.
For this time arround, it seems odd and way off.
I am here for 2 years now, wich is not a lot. but this weather is usaly more likely acouring in winter and fall.
What do you think?
How is the weather changing after all across the planet?
Am i curently witnessing the effects of the solar minimum?
And what do you think about unconventional clouds (possibly man made clouds) that havent exsisted 30 years ago?
19 of the last 20 years were the warmest on record. 2020 tied for first. Your local weather has nothing to do with global climate.
I believe European weather is being influenced by the North Atlantic Oscillation or NAO. Which is a product of both decreasing ice sheet cover in the Arctic and changes in the Polar vortex. Both of which are directly related but have nothing to do with solar variability and everything to do with Climate change. Specifically, the extreme warming of the Arctic!
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Atlantic_oscillation
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polar_vortex
Explains a lot. Love your videos and much thanks.
... did he really just use Wikipedia as his source? If his point on how minimal the suns affect is, wouldn’t the same apply to the minimal amount of trace gases man is responsible for adding to our atmosphere? Only 0.04% of our Atmosphere is Co2, and of that 97% is naturally occurring. That leaves only 3% of the total 0.04%, that’s less that half of one percent of an essential gas to all life on earth that’s man-made, and beneficial. If we could reduced it, only the vegetation would suffer. Nothing about climate change rings true.
Twice.
I think additionally that the extremely small percentage (3% of the 0.04%) is man made could cause a 2W / Sq meter change is completely unbelievable. More IPCC BS data..
No it wouldn't, your whole thought process is ass-backward.
Actually, wikipedia has been found to be a very reliable source. Sure, someone can always put some nonsense on there but others will edit....the whole voluntary concept is pretty cool i think. There is a wealth of information on there about pretty much any subject you may be interested in. In a way it isn't really a single source but a whole bunch of sources.
@@forestdweller5581 Ya, the encyclopedia's of yore were the same way actually.
Winter is coming
PRECISELY!!!😨👍🏽
Costco has excellent cold weather clothing, and for unbeatable prices!!!👍🏽 They have this brand called 32° for $1 over cost😍, and the Department stores at malls have it for $20 mark ups, INSANE!!😡
What if "winter is coming" was predictive programming?
Doesn't Sun spot activity drive solar wind volume? And don't solar winds in turn affect cloud cover? And isn't that cloud cover (water vapor) the biggest driver of the greenhouse effect?
Please explain to me.
*"Doesn't Sun spot activity drive solar wind volume"*
There's never been any correlation of Solar cycle to climate variation. There was some recent research published with results of potential cloud seed from galactic cosmic rays(GCR) which increases during minimum solar cycles, but the results were minimal and only applied to the mid-troposphere. Which doesn't affect climate globally and doesn't not account for warming land, ocean and air temps in the northern hemisphere or the rise in nighttime temps! See: Kirkby 2011.
*"And isn't that cloud cover (water vapor) the biggest driver of the greenhouse effect"*
Yep! But it's a feedback mechanism. Meaning, it needs temps to change in order to increase or decrease it's concentration in the atmosphere. Also, the atmosphere has a saturation point for water vapor and it either precipitates back as rain or snow, or condenses into clouds. Which reflects UV radiation, causing a cooling affect.
I love the comments where is my popcorn!
They now have solar popcorn poppers.
You know this is extremely accurate when UA-cam feels the need to put a Wikipedia link to climate change and global warming under it 🤣🤣
Thanks for pointing me at the video I need to watch UA-cam 😂😂
Your spot on, the global elite will use this natural cycle to loot & gain control from the people in the name of saving the planet. Every time I see the propaganda link I know there over the target & should pay attention.
UA-cam sucks ass...heaven forbid actual science be discussed...
So what if we go into a solar minimum? We've got lucky that we're further allowed to pump our atmosphere with co2 and methane without too many consequences. But what happens when this minimum ends in 100-200 years, we raised the co2 amount in the atmosphere very high and the people living then have a big big problem. So your solution is to push the question of using renewables to further generation so yours can live an easy life?
@@sixtus9559 there was a ton more CO2 back when the earth was much younger....we'll be fine relaaax
@@claudiafahey1353 yeah but you do know in what time intervall this co2 accumulated in the past right? Hundredthousand, million years not hundreds and the temperatures were up to 12 Celsius higher than now. Let's add everywhere 12 Celsius, in how many places is it nice to live now? Nearly none just some furthest north.
as a south east texan.... bring on the cooling please. this heat sucks 🤣
California is with you on that one 🤙🏼
Smykush I live by Toronto and it has yet to snow..
Please send us some warm winds. Gonna be just above freezing next weekend
@Smykush dont worry warming stops at the borders just ask China
move to Scotland, bring a thick coat, and that's for summer
A person named Blaze Norton does reports on solar radiance?! (5:50)
Perfect :D
You lost all credibility when I saw the one book you can read on the shelf. How dare you?
What book?
Clearly not a real scientist.
Right, just another mouthpiece.
Is this her dad or something?!?!
Great book you should read it.
You should read it . Great observations. It actually makes it easier to survive under capitalism if you understand how it really works.
It’s a glitch in the matrix
that just could be .
A glitch in the election
You mean Dominion has their hands in everything? No wonder there is climate change. mMybe we are actually cooling, but they flipped the votes.
There’s way too many references made in this video that have been based on computer models. Failed ones at that.
there are? such as?
@@deathgatedeathstar9259 There are several references made which are derived from computer models in which the data entered is over stated, tampered with, or just plain fraudulent. Wikileaks pulls their references from the IPCC and the IPCC gets their data references from frauds likes Micheal Mann, and James Hanson and every single production they've made since 1988 has been more than wrong, its been total fraud. As well, heres a link to old news paper clippings that show just how wrong computer models and climate scientists are. cei.org/blog/wrong-again-50-years-failed-eco-pocalyptic-predictions
@@johnnyjones3362 Where are computer models mentioned in those clippings?
@@godfreypigott The question is when. In the video he references Wikileaks. Wikileaks takes their climate data form predicted climate modelling which comes from NOAA and NASA. These climate models are based on climate projections which produce wild and inaccurate claims. Over the last 30 years, predictions have been made about climate that never turned out correct, just incredibly wrong. Take temperature graphs that start in 1979. Why 1979 as a starting point? Because it shows a warming trend. What it doesn't show is that it was much hotter in the 30's but that doesn't fit the current narrative or the the hysteria. Nearly every graph the IPCC presents as definitive science on climate change, whether it be forest fires, drought, flooding, or temperature, all start at different years so that it shows a trend that things are getting worse. This is fraud and this video's sources are as well.
@@johnnyjones3362 Haha - wikileaks - all credibility gone.
The problem with the "small W/sqm" insolation variance is that is at the equator. At the poles, where most of the warming is happening, you get refraction due to the angle of inclination of the sun to the atmosphere and surface, plus higher surface albedo. Esp the refraction, you have to look at the solar irradiance at various wavelengths, as blue and UV get refracted away into space while the redder colors are refracted to the surface, EXCEPT that surface temperatures vary the refraction, so a warmer surface varies refraction by as much a 4 minutes of arc at the horizon so the amount of sunlight reaching the surface can be varied by refraction depending on whether the sea or ground surface is colder or warmer and thus keeping the air temperature in the bottom 100 feet of atmosphere colder or warmer. ALSO, more CO2 increases the amount of blue frequencies reaching the surface, thus reducing refraction away from the surface of the bluer frequencies (as we see on Mars, the CO2 atmosphere causes blue skies at sunrise and sunsets) but a change of CO2 of a tiny fraction of a percent is a rather miniscule difference.
I come from June of 2022, And I can tell you right now we are facing a very cold weather situation,in fact I have been cold ill durung one month.... which could be related to solar cycles......
THE SKY IS FALLING, THE SKY IS FALLING! RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!
As long as you wear two mask's in you house while running!
Excellent! So glad I found this channel.
Liberals so stupid they don't understand air is made of 78% Nitrogen, 21% Oxygen, and 1% Hydrogen with 0.05% CO2. To top that off, 99.999999999% of 0.05% of CO2 comes from microorganisms. Every square inch of Earth is microorganisms. Why do you put food inside freezers? Cold temperatures prevent bacterial growth. Same thing with Earth. Temperatures go down, bacterial growth goes down than CO2 goes down and vice versa. Look at any global temperature graph of Earth in billions of years. Temperature always had cyclical change. Always!!. Liberals soo stupid they don't understand what the sun is, which is a fusion reaction of two different isotopes of hydrogen tritium and deuterium overcoming nuclear bonds with gravity, which is extremely inefficient and causes temperature to change.
Hallooo, Dave Borlace! 👍😬
What a breath of fresh air you are, sir! You are 100% spot-on.
I see the dateline for this topic “…Grand Solar Minimum…”, is 4 years ago. It is bizarre that our paths haven’t crossed before as I’ve been banging on about this fiasco, for about less than half that time.
I will have to email you or whatever but just want to say there is some agenda running here. My qualifications are in engineering but have done chemistry, physics, geology and maths, to A-level. I’ve pushed 450,000 years of climate data out there, proving that CO2 has nothing to do with this “peak” warming but no one’s listening. They’re so block headed stupid that it’s dangerous to human survival - they’re even “sowing” aluminium dust on the cumulus nimbus! 😡🤦♂️
Makes you wonder if they’re all affected by a Dunning-Kruger “virus” 😂🤣 Keep-up the good work, I’ll try to email… 👍🇬🇧
...and we will have even more crop yield problems than we are already starting to have this year (2022)
Liberals so stupid they don't understand air is made of 78% Nitrogen, 21% Oxygen, and 1% Hydrogen with 0.05% CO2. To top that off, 99.999999999% of 0.05% of CO2 comes from microorganisms. Every square inch of Earth is microorganisms. Why do you put food inside freezers? Cold temperatures prevent bacterial growth. Same thing with Earth. Temperatures go down, bacterial growth goes down than CO2 goes down and vice versa. Look at any global temperature graph of Earth in billions of years. Temperature always had cyclical change. Always!!. Liberals soo stupid they don't understand what the sun is, which is a fusion reaction of two different isotopes of hydrogen tritium and deuterium overcoming nuclear bonds with gravity, which is extremely inefficient and causes temperature to change.
"Global Cooling"
UA-cam Context: Global warming.
bRUH
Search anything.... you will get the opposite Lefty approved results.
Like Piers Corbyn will get 3 results and MORON commie brother will get a thousand.
@@GordoGambler But the video is about global warming, did you watch it? And also do you know how search algorithms work? Are you imagining them to be little leftist Kobolds who manually alter every search-result?
@@GordoGambler "Like Piers Corbyn will get 3 results"
And all of them wrong if his history for predicting global temperate is an indication
*YOYO EFFECTS* And Strange Temperatures Never Heard Of.
*HOT MAN MADE IONIZING NUCLEAR PARTICLES RELEASED INTO THE ENVIRONMENT THAT REMAINS 🔥 HOT FROM SECONDS TO BILLIONS OF YEARS!*
Never mentioned.
Global COOLING came this spring, DOWN .38C. FACT
Also, the verbiage:
"Our sun is reaching the end of it's normal 11 year cycle and is now approaching a period of minimum solar activity. This one's being dubbed the Grand Solar Minimum" i.e. the first thing stated above is false. The now current minimum of solar activity is NOT the GSM. Further misrepresentations. The GSM is NOT a normal solar minimum it is a period of time encapsualting one or more low periods of maximum solar activity.
I think he said it right. The sun has 11years cycles and its in a min cycle thats going beyond 11years. I guess ill have to watch the video again. Over all i thought it was well presented
You do realize the scientist have a relatively small section of cycles to compare
@Andy Theber ... Well (and I hate quoting them) NASA reckon we are as did Landschiedt and Zharakova. The signs are everywhere with massive crop losses across the planet, new all-time cold records everywhere and the odd warm one too. Both are signs of the developing GSM. Real cooling does not properly begin until 2020. Current cooling (about -0.5C since end of 2015) can be mostly attributed to ENSO.
Global warmists make accurate predictions only after the event.
Remember snow and the ice caps melted a long time ago. Many times in fact. Of course NH snow mass was 3 sd above normal earlier in the year.
GSM... that will destroy the climate scam. Of course we know media will say the GSM is worse from manmade climate change. Bet your lifesavings on it.
Have u watch the video? He is not saying it’s gonna happen but he is showing scientific evidence that it will not slowdown global warming that way we would like to. Fighting reality won’t save us from unnatural climate change either. We gotta make a change, and believe me we will live a lot happier in a healthy world.
If I am not mistaken, the more sun spots, the worse the flare activity? So we are looking at a very bumpy time of it in 2024-26, when we are at solar maximum. Oh, btw, so much for that ice age, huh?
The first 14 seconds is my favorite.
How dare you!
Lol
Voted best overall reply. Hilarious!!!!
Great job! Giving lots of complicated info & data in a way most folks can understand. Brilliant.
Most folks _could_ understand it, but a combination of laziness and bias prevents what seems to be (if the comments here can be taken as representative..) the majority from doing so.
Liberals so stupid they don't understand air is made of 78% Nitrogen, 21% Oxygen, and 1% Hydrogen with 0.05% CO2. To top that off, 99.999999999% of 0.05% of CO2 comes from microorganisms. Every square inch of Earth is microorganisms. Why do you put food inside freezers? Cold temperatures prevent bacterial growth. Same thing with Earth. Temperatures go down, bacterial growth goes down than CO2 goes down and vice versa. Look at any global temperature graph of Earth in billions of years. Temperature always had cyclical change. Always!!. Liberals soo stupid they don't understand what the sun is, which is a fusion reaction of two different isotopes of hydrogen tritium and deuterium overcoming nuclear bonds with gravity, which is extremely inefficient and causes temperature to change.
The postulated amplifying effect of solar variation or sunspot activity from solar wind and associated emanations creating higher cloud cover and/or affecting convection and so heat transfer (some of it at the top of tropical thunderstorms ) was not touched on -- what role or magnitude this and similar side effects might play is moot.
I got a feeling many people in these comments didn’t watch the video
Watch the video??? but it's boring and contradicts the real truth that I know all!
LOL 😂
@@AMPProf wdym?
"We all have to change our lifestyles radically". I'm not convinced that's true. As a small example of what I mean, Changing to an electric car from and ice car doesn't feel like a radical change. Changing to the new meatless meat patties doesn't feel like a radical change. etc... In fact. Think of all the changes that have happened from around 100 years ago. Now that's a radical change. The amount we would have to change to completely offset co2 seems quite trivial in comparison.
Lucid Moses that’s what they all say. 🥺
You'll have to pull my weed whacker from my cold dead hands. I'm British and I have the right to bare lawns.
You can still have a weed whacker. You just need to get a battery powered one.
@@grindupBaker I have a battery one and a bigger yard then most brits
We don't have to change our lifestyles radically if we can find a way to continue using a similar amount of energy, I doubt that's possible over the next 20 years.
Store food to the rafters. We will have a decade of very poor food production
Big contributor is negligent fishing practices, destrorying massive carbon sink ecosystems in favor of dragging nets for fish. Want to make an impact locally, stop buy fish
Plot temperature in degrees above absolute zero and then illustrate how small the increase in temperature is on that scale.
As an old guy who can now soak up huge amounts more information via YT etc as opposed to accessing and reading books as in my childhood, the difficulty I find however, is the amount of 'lies, BS, nonsense & pseudo-science etc' one has to wade through to eventually find worthy information I can then add to my understanding in order to subsequently formulate MY opinions :) To this end, your channel and the info you provide and your delivery of that info, makes you one of the best channels on YT in my view :) Keep up the great work and many thanks.
Translation: Thanks for saying what I WANT to hear. 🤣
...me too on the utube thing...i still do not believe co2 can cause change in climate...i totally agree that the Grand Solar Minimum cycle causes climate to change...there were 2 volcanic eruptions during the maunder min, and we have 2 huge volcanoes that have given the s. Hemisphere a chill...food supply will be affected this yr and a few to come
It's a religion not science.
@@ValMartinIreland You are correct, Global warming IS religious dogma.
Why is Growing Degree Days down across the planet, facts say we are cooling NOT getting hotter!
facts that are revealed....... they push what they want you to hear....... go look for record old temps from this last years winters. auz are in winter go see dont b blind
He references the IPCC and trusts their data, however not a single of their models was able since 1988 to accurately predict temperatures. All these models are running much too hot, that happens when you need a predetermined outcome and weighs the influence of CO2 far too heavy. The presentation started well but soon enough came down to the fantasy world of activism.
For one, the IPCC is a review body. They have no original data they use. They review and post data that's already been published in the scientific literature of science.
Two, the models the IPCC has posted have predicted temps very well. See "Well-estimated global surface warming in climate projections selected for ENSO phase". Risbey et.al. 2014.
Also, climate models are mathematical equations that use past climate data. So they hindcast with almost 100% accuracy. Their forecasting ability is based on scenarios of Co2 emissions. The more we emit the more they predict warming and so on! So i'd love to see this "website" you got your info from that says models haven't predicted well!
@@House_Stark Your quote ..Also, climate models are mathematical equations that use past climate data..maybe this why they are changing historical data with AC v 1 - 2 🥶
Photosynthesizing plants are believed to have changed the atmosphere from reducing to oxidizing, a billion or so years ago. Perhaps we owe them a favor...
Over 40% of our CO2 emissions are never absorbed by plants. That's because they already have more than what they need to thrive.
Convenient to start your chart in 1975.
most idiots were born in ;75,just trying to educate them,brainwashed robots..
Huh? He had charts going back hundreds of years.
Hundreds of years? And here I thought by suv was causing it
Of course they start the chart in 1975, if they started it in the 1930s it wouldn’t show a rise and that doesn’t fit their narrative or agenda. It’s one of the many “tricks” in the alarmists arsenal.
@@fullmontyuk more heat records were set in the 1930s than any other decade of the 20th century. It was by far the hottest decade. In 1975 scientists thought we were going into an ice age because it was unusually cold. That’s why it’s disingenuous to show a trend from the 1970s because it was the coolest decade of the 20th century. Look at the “unaltered” data of these decades, it’s freely available on the internet.
H2O number one greenhouse gas by far... no mention of it. No mention of cloud cover variation whatsoever. Water vapor is not only two orders of magnitude more volume in the atmosphere than CO2, but clouds have a dramatic cooling effect by reflecting radiation back into space. So water can both warm and cool the planet depending on variations in quantity and surface area.
What video also fails to mention is that cosmic radiation has an effect on cloud cover and cloud cover is increased when the Earth is hit with these particles.
There's also a variance in the distance the Earth sits from the sun. When a solar minimum lines up with an apex in distance from sun, more cosmic radiation hits us, and condensation increases in the atmosphere... causing excessive cloud formation and precipitation. This causes cooling. And this is why temps are going to drop over the next decade.
The fact that the blue band appears under the video, an official confirmation.
I have been following Prof Valentina Zharkova who is the mathematician and solar Physicist who has explained how sun spots are formed and the influence of the sun's core has on the 11-12yr solar cycles. She gives some interesting insights and warnings about Cycle 26, which will follow the current Cycle 25 Grand solar minimum. She points out that over the next 33yrs winters in both the arctic and Antarctic will be much cooler. The 2022 winter was the coldest in 150yrs at both Poles.
Agree.
Zharkova has been wrong about the current cycle, so you are choosing to follow someone who has yet to make a correct prediction.