A Modern Grand Maximum Simply Ignored
Important news: evidence of a possible solar influence on Earth’s climate, appears to be undeniable. But, what of CO2 and the so-called greenhouse effect? Is it real? Nope– the analogy that increasing atmospheric CO2 acts like a greenhouse has been shattered with the grand debunking of an old experiment, proving Al Gore does not know his gas from a hole in a bottle! (Climate change in a shoebox: Right result, wrong physics)
What we now know about the sun explains everything about late 20th century warming. As it turns out, “the modern Grand maximum (which occurred during solar cycles 19–23, i.e., 1950-2009),” says Ilya Usoskin, “was a rare or even unique event, in both magnitude and duration, in the past three millennia.” [Usoskin et al., Evidence for distinct modes of solar activity, A&A 562 (2014) – PDF]
Grand solar maxima occur when several solar cycles exhibit greater than average activity… Solar cycles still occur during these grand solar maximum periods but the intensity of those cycles are greater. Grand solar maxima have shown some correlation with global and regional climate changes. ~wiki
Even wiki seems to understand that changes in solar activity have an influence on Earth’s climate. Generally, “solar activity is well confined within a relatively narrow range,” says Usoskin. But what happens in an extreme case of solar activity –e.g., how about a, 3,000-year solar activity record? We know because we just lived through it –i.e., a period of global warming.
IPCC scientists have conducted relatively few studies of the Sun’s influence on modern warming, assuming that the temperature influence of this rare and unique Grand maximum of solar activity, which has occurred only once in the past 3,000 years, is far inferior to the radiative power provided by the rising CO2 concentration of the Earth’s atmosphere. ~CO2 Science
So true and that is why we live in this bizarre and Kafkaesque reality of academia’s global warming alarmism. Working stiffs in the free enterprise economy, engaged in the business of living for the benefit of all society, like Randian heroes, are accused of the crime of releasing CO2 into the atmosphere and destroying the Earth as government scientists simply ignore decades-long, unique and rare record-setting solar events.
All we have to do is count sunspots. “During solar maximum,” as anyone can read in wiki, “large numbers of sunspots appear and the sun’s irradiance output grows.” Instead, for years we’ve been wasting tax dollars on practitioners of the new science (dare I say, art) of Parameterization Gazing. These gazers (nay, scryers) feel uniquely qualified to lend their unique insight to the global warming project and have pledged their very souls to the mission of saving the world from Americanism.
Given such a lofty goal, I feel obliged to join this scryers club of devoted Earth-savers and it really is very simple: we look at grid cells. The world is divided up into grids with official thermometers in them and we look at the data, albeit data that has been suitably massaged, adjusted and corrected for this very purpose. That’s where our job begins as only 20% of these grids actually have official thermometer readings. We scryers must fill in the gaps and supply all of the missing data. The work requires deep reflection as we must scry the results of neighboring grid cells and provide data where no data exists or has been lost or deleted or has otherwise simply gone missing.
Although not required, when I am at work scrying, I wear a handmade hairshirt and a “Yes We Can” hat to focus all of my efforts and insights on the serious job at hand. A lot of statistics are involved and many complex mathematical computations also are required that can only be done at the subconscious level where the results are passed through the mind’s eye of the scryer to sharpen the clarity and coherency of the information that otherwise would be nothing but irreconcilable images of little or no use to the continuing advancement of humanity and the needed saving of the planet.
We scryers literally see the future in the data! For some, interpreting the data requires a self-induced, trance-like state of awareness with candlelight and burning incense to increase their receptivity. Personally, I prefer the light of an old CRT tube which for me lends a sort old-world digital-ness and credibility to the nascent science of climatology.
Embarking on this mission with nothing more than a bit of sleep-deprivation, a copious lavage of blond-roast coffee and the occasional 3-sip of Irish Whiskey for company, I have found that saving humanity from the humiliation of capitalism, self-awareness and personal responsibility has been a grueling and yet satisfying process. The only downside is that with modern global warming being the result of the largest grand maxima in 3,000 years, the continued support of Mann’s hockey stick (long after it was debunked), cannot be seen as anything other than one thing: evidence of… ulterior motives and the grandest con job of all time. Ditto re academia’s likening of the climate change phenomenon to the analogy of a greenhouse (also debunked–see above); and, ditto re academia’s claim of a consensus of opinion among scientists concerning global warming theory (the public has begun to see through the charade and scientists outside the West liken climatology to the ancient science of astrology).
“It is clear from the ease with which Mann lies about things that would not withstand ten minutes of scrutiny in a courtroom,” says Mark Stein (see Amicus brief ), “that he has no intention of proceeding to trial.” The same can be said of the claimed 97% consensus of opinion put forward by the IPCC and the Eurocommunists, the Left and rabid environmentalists – blaming humanity for causing late 20th century global warming – that has been dutifully reported by a nutty liberal mainstream media. The 97% consensus claim is tantamount to a ‘Convert to Islam or Die’ warning from Isis to Iraq Christians, to keep the western scientists in line or face academic and societal ostracism.