Consensus Free Climate Science

"Sunspot activity is at its weakest for any solar maximum in a century or more."

That's a verifiable observation, easily fact checked. No computer models, hockey-stick graphs, or signed declarations from UN NGO's and various peer reviewed journals proclaiming consensus from highly credentialed climate scientist are necessary to check for yourself. Even the "pro-Global Warming/Climate Change" websites basically report the facts regarding the lack of sunspots during the present solar maximum.

Amateur solar enthusiasts who look at the sun themselves with solar telescopes, and have access to the historical record of sunspot activity can verify it for themselves.

But what does this really mean?

When the shit hits the fan, it's the end of the world as we know it.

Now, when dealing with Galactic time scales, "imminent" could mean 10, 20, several hundred or even a thousand years from now.

Or it could mean tomorrow.

But one thing is undeniable, and no scientific consensus is required to make the following statement: the history of the Earth's climate is cyclical, characterized by long periods of ice age climate conditions interspersed by short periods of warm weather called interglacials.

At the present, we are undoubtedly in an interglacial. Some would argue we are at the end of the latest interglacial.

Reports on sunspot activity lend some credence to this theory.

Consensus or not, one fact does remain...many of the supporters of human caused climate change have a record of making bold predictions in the past decade that have turned out completely wrong. This DailyMail article highlights one particularly egregious example of a BBC report that claimed the Arctic summers would be "ice-free" by 2013.

Only six years ago, the BBC reported that the Arctic would be ice-free in summer by 2013, citing a scientist in the US who claimed this was a ‘conservative’ forecast. Perhaps it was their confidence that led more than 20 yachts to try to sail the Northwest Passage from the Atlantic to the Pacific this summer. As of last week, all these vessels were stuck in the ice, some at the eastern end of the passage in Prince Regent Inlet, others further west at Cape Bathurst.

Shipping experts said the only way these vessels were likely to be freed was by the icebreakers of the Canadian coastguard. According to the official Canadian government website, the Northwest Passage has remained ice-bound and impassable all summer.

The BBC’s 2007 report quoted scientist Professor Wieslaw Maslowski, who based his views on super-computer models and the fact that ‘we use a high-resolution regional model for the Arctic Ocean and sea ice’.

He was confident his results were ‘much more realistic’ than other projections, which ‘underestimate the amount of heat delivered to the sea ice’. Also quoted was Cambridge University expert

Professor Peter Wadhams. He backed Professor Maslowski, saying his model was ‘more efficient’ than others because it ‘takes account of processes that happen internally in the ice’.

He added: ‘This is not a cycle; not just a fluctuation. In the end, it will all just melt away quite suddenly.’

Sure thing, Professor. Because computer models and fossil fuel! Note that another pro-man made global warming/climate change organization also reports on the current minimal sunspot activity is comparable to the last "mini-ice age" of the late 17th and early 18th centuries.

The combined data indicate that we may soon be headed into what's known as a grand minimum, a period of unusually low solar activity.

The predicted solar "sleep" is being compared to the last grand minimum on record, which occurred between 1645 and 1715.

Known as the Maunder Minimum, the roughly 70-year period coincided with the coldest spell of the Little Ice Age, when European canals regularly froze solid and Alpine glaciers encroached on mountain villages.

Hmmmm....think the Sun's activity may actually have something to do with the current record levels of cold wintry conditions all around the planet these past few months? Even here in Hawaii, with our year round tropical climate, we've had record lows in 2013.

It seems only common sense to conclude that the sun is THE primary driver of climate on Earth. Don't tell that to our (Government funded) experts...

"We have some interesting hints that solar activity is associated with climate, but we don't understand the association," said Dean Pesnell, project scientist for NASA's Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO).

Also, even if there is a climate link, Pesnell doesn't think another grand minimum is likely to trigger a cold snap.

"With what's happening in current times—we've added considerable amounts of carbon dioxide and methane and other greenhouse gases to the atmosphere," said Pesnell, who wasn't involved in the suite of new sun studies.

"I don't think you'd see the same cooling effects today if the sun went into another Maunder Minimum-type behavior."

Ah, so all these record low temperatures of 2013 are indicative of nothing significant, eh?

So it appears we DO have some sort of a consensus.

During the current phase of the solar cycle, the Sun appears to be entering a phase of minimal sunspot activity compared to the last mini-ice age.

But we still have a large number of scientists who are true believers in the infallibility of computer models predicting man made global warming...and they are all looking at the current solar cycle, and the reports of new record low temperatures all over the planet, and still trying to tell us all that Global Warming from man made causes is still a threat to humanity.

Remember...97% of scientists agree that man made climate change is real!

Where did that 97% number that has been touted over and over again as the holy grail of scientifically proven consensus actually come from anyhow? According to the leading website for "climate-change deniers," it was a dishonest and disingenuous "study" that came up with it. From  The 97% consensus myth – busted by a real survey:

So, the inconvenient truth here is that about half of the world’s largest organization of meteorological and climate professionals don’t think humans are “mostly” the cause of Anthropogenic Global Warming the rest will probably get smeared as “deniers”

 

It would be more accurate to say that 97% of the scientists who receive funding and grants to support the global warming propaganda industry agree.

As for me...I know what I think.