Solar inactivity to cause massive cooling on Earth in the next few years.

Thank you for posting this, it is a useful addition to the dialogue.

I DO believe it, when it is cited that the north pole ice-sheet is shrinking. But, occasionally there is a report (that is oddly obscure) that reports something such as the South Pole ice sheet is growing.

Though some may find these seemingly contradictory reports at odds, I (as an untrained individual with no scientific background) think this may be an indication of a differing solar effect, as the north pole and south pole are both exposed to two sides of the sun.

If the US, India, and China are in a lifeboat (Earth) and India/China are chopping holes in their side of the hull, I do not believe that is is a waste of time for the US to be chopping a smaller hole at a slower rate than those other two, but...

I have heard the generals policies of the US in the 1960's-70's referred to as "polluting for fun and profit". But if I were a power-broker in the oil industry, I would recognize that I was not in the oil business, I was in the portable energy business.

Looking 100 years in the future, there will still be a cost-effective separation of labor. By that I mean that food will be grown in rural farm regions, and factories will be in dense population clusters. Food must be transported by trains/trucks.

Even if the US (the most successful country in the history of mankind) begins using (dragged kicking and screaming) mass-transport and E-Bikes, The oil industry will still supply the chemical/plastics industries, and hopefully (under my direction) will have diversified into providing (instead of limiting) transportation options.

Don't hold your breath...short-sightedness seems to be a common US corporate disease...

The information presented in that link is false.

Skip-shooters, HAM radio operators and fellow radio pirates can tell you we just hit the solar minimum this year - our first magnetically reversed sun spot was seen just a couple of weeks ago signaling that the sun will be getting busier for the next 11 years.

So, according to that link the planet should have been getting cooler for the past 11 years and it did not; we broke heat records in many areas. And now with the sun becoming more active... expect more heat records for the next half solar cycle since we're adding more solar activity to an already increasing planetary climate destabilization.

Look, as of today there are no sun spots:

We should be freezing our butts off, but it's the middle of winter and 66°F outside here.

The story sited above is an excellent example of how to use bad journalism in an attempt to sell a controversial idea. It is good practice to read such articles from time to time to keep one's skeptical muscles toned.

First of all, getting science from a business magazine is never a great idea.

R. Timothy Patterson, professor of geology and director of the Ottawa-Carleton Geoscience Center of Canada's Carleton University, says that "CO2 variations show little correlation with our planet's climate on long, medium and even short time scales."

So is this guy a solar scientist? A climatologist? Nope. A geologist. A scientist playing outside of their own field is always a caution sign.

Rather, he says, "I and the first-class scientists I work with are consistently finding excellent correlations between the regular fluctuations of the sun and earthly climate. This is not surprising. The sun and the stars are the ultimate source of energy on this planet."

Ah yes. The star energy. Make sure to put on your star-screen boys and girls or you're gonna get a bad star burn. I know this is a minor point, but when a person sounds like an idiot you should leave open the possibility that they are.

Patterson, sharing Tapping's concern, says: "Solar scientists predict that, by 2020, the sun will be starting into its weakest Schwabe cycle of the past two centuries, likely leading to unusually cool conditions on Earth."

You'll notice that he refers to "solar scientists", but doesn't actually quote or cite any. We're supposed to take the geologist's word for it.

This article references a Hoover Institution study. The Hoover Institution, a very little research revealed, is a think-tank with a political agenda. Beware articles that avoid primary sources.

I could go on, but there is little point.

--
There are arguments to be made both for and against global warming. The best of these appear in magazines like _Science_ and _Nature_ and a bunch of journals that nobody here is likely to have access to. If the article you are reading doesn't come from one of these sources or doesn't cite one of these sources you are wise to treat its conclusions with a healthy dose of skepticism. Two phrases to watch for are "published" and "peer reviewed."

(Read _Science News_. It's an awesome source for hard information. I know I plug this magazine once a month, but I swear I don't get any kickbacks.)

I've read all three of those when I can.

*And it's now 70 degrees outside. Brrrr...*

LOL :)

81°F today. Damn global cooling, stupid cold burning sun.

Can ya feel the chill?

81°F today. Damn global cooling, stupid cold burning sun.

Can ya feel the chill?

Dunno where you live.. here in the SF Bay Area it was like late spring weather. So I went out for a motorcycle ride totally enjoying the weather. But, y'know, it's winter and even here in california it ought to be colder than this. It's february !!

Last week there were tornado's.. that's a summer phenomenon, not winter. I grew up in the midwest (Kansas) and know a thing or two about tornado's. As a kid we remembered tornado season starting when Disney showed The Wizard of Oz on TV.. this happened every spring, and shortly after the tornado's would start.