Is significant global cooling on the way?

[philosslayer]

GLOBAL COOLING: Decade long ice age predicted as sun 'hibernates'

SCIENTISTS claim we are in for a decade-long freeze as the sun slows down solar activity by up to 60 per cent.
A team of European researchers have unveiled a scientific model showing that the Earth is likely to experience a “mini ice age” from 2030 to 2040 as a result of decreased solar activity.

At the National Astronomy Meeting in Wales, Northumbria University professor Valentina Zharkova said fluctuations an 11-year cycle of solar activity the sun goes through would be responsible for a freeze, the like of which has not been experienced since the 1600s.

From 1645 to 1715 global temperatures dropped due to low solar activity so much that the planet experienced a 70-year ice age known as Maunder Minimum which saw the River Thames in London completely frozen.

The researchers have now developed a "double dynamo "model that can better predict when the next freeze will be.

Based on current cycles, they predict solar activity dwindling for ten years from 2030.

Professor Zharkova said two magnetic waves will cancel each other out in about 2030, leading to a drop in sun spots and solar flares of about 60 per cent.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/science/616937/GLOBAL-COOLING-Decade-long-ice-age-predicted-as-sun-hibernates

[truebluegreen]

1. No.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2015/07/14/cnn-advances-debunked-claim-that-changes-in-sun/204412

[lunatica]

2. Climate change is going to be the only news story soon

[geomon666]

3. A nice long cooling would be great.

Not too cold, don't want anyone to suffer but I sure could use a break in the summer months.

[Nye Bevan]

4. Last time I posted such an article it was locked by Cyberswede

as "Creative Speculation".

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022911565

[trumad]

6. That was a great lock.

[Warren Stupidity]

12. It ought to be a tos at this point.

Why are we harboring right wing denialists here?

[Nye Bevan]

18. As an experiment I sent a SOP alert on this OP to the GD hosts.

It will be interesting to see whether or not such an article is still considered to be "Creative Speculation" or if the current GD Hosts take a more open view.

[rhett o rick]

20. Personally I would let this stand. I am not afraid of posts like this. They won't hurt

anyone. I don't agree but I am against locking down everything I don't agree with. You have options other than censoring. Trash the thread, ignore the OP editor, ignore the thread, or refute the OP in the thread.

Too many times people lock and hide because they can. This is intended to be a "politically liberal" message board which means we will listen to opinions other than only those we agree with. Once we start locking and hiding and banning everything we don't agree with, we become conservatives.

[hatrack]

15. Well, when you post op-ed columns from Forbes in scientific drag . . .

Entitled "To The Horror Of Global Warming Alarmists, Global Cooling Is Here", you don't get to act all pinched, persecuted and self-righteous when they get locked.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news and all that.

[cherokeeprogressive]

17. It's simple really. You blasphemed.

You're a heretic. A right wing denier. According to some here, you should be TOS'd for not doing the climate change goosestep.

[villager]

27. So it's a "goosestep" now, is it?

Damn Earth-loving hippies commie Nazis!

[arcane1]

5. They don't appear to link to this study. Only mention of a "claim"

I'll need more than that, especially considering some of the other headlines on that site!

[IDemo]

7. They appear to be missing the latest "Bat Boy" news

But that would fit right in, from the looks of it.

[Logical]

11. Bat boy was real! I went to high school with him. Nice guy! Nt

[Orrex]

24. I lived in Austin TX when Bat Boy was reportedly trapped in a cave outside of town

That's all I'm saying about it.

[pinboy3niner]

9. See the link in Post #1 for the debunking. nt

[cheapdate]

8. Broadly speaking, the Earth's equilibrium temperature

depends on 3 things: the amount of incoming solar radiation (irradiance), the Earth's reflectance (albedo), and the presence of selective emitters and absorbers (greenhouse gases) in the atmosphere. A decline in irradiance would affect the energy balance and the temperature. All that CO2 will still be there (it's very persistent).

[doc03]

10. 2030? I will probably be dead by then anyway. The experts say we have global warming or

cooling. Eggs are bad for you now they aren't. Coffee was bad now it's not. Chocolate was bad now it is good. I
get the feeling these f----g experts don't know shit from Shinola.

[CreekDog]

36. That only matters if you're the only person on earth that matters

[hatrack]

13. No, barring a collapse of the North Atlantic halocline current - and that would be regional anyway .

.

[nadinbrzezinski]

14. Nope

[951-Riverside]

16. The violence in Syria and the refugee crisis is all the evidence we need about global warming

Why do we continue to give these climate change deniers the time of day?

[philosslayer]

29. How is this "climate change denial"?

This is an article about solar activity. Which has zero to do with long term, man-caused climate change.

[tkmorris]

19. Where'd the OP go?

Come on man, you posted this compost pile, get back in here and defend it. Or delete it. Your call.

[philosslayer]

21. Its a news story

I'm not here to defend it or attack it. I simply posted it as a discussion point. Reading the responses, I'm a bit perplexed by the reaction. This article in no way attempts to debunk the long term likelihood of climate change due to human activity. To the contrary, it extends a scientific hypothesis based on a known phenomena.... global cooling based on solar activity (or a lack thereof).

Lets be clear... if global cooling occurs based on solar activity, it is a short term phenomena, and has ZERO to do with the long term effects of climate change based.

[pintobean]

25. It's the way DU rolls

Always has. It's our version of bible thumping.

[Javaman]

22. oh FFS, no.

please don't post dribble like this again. it's exhausting and my brain gets sad.

[etherealtruth]

23. oh for FFS .... why trot out climate change denial here?

.... the false conclusions are trotted out by climate change/ global warming deniers ... only.


http://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewfrancis/2015/07/17/no-sunspots-will-not-cause-a-new-ice-age/


http://mediamatters.org/blog/2015/07/14/cnn-advances-debunked-claim-that-changes-in-sun/204412

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2015/07/no-earth-not-heading-mini-ice-age


Google can help you locate scholarly articles and information

[philosslayer]

28. This is NOT climate change denial

Can we be clear on this? This is a hypothesis based on the activity of the sun. It has no bearing whatsoever on long term man-made climate change. Do you disagree with the fact that the sun has an impact on our weather, and that there is evidence that the Maunder Minimum may have caused a significant cooling episode several hundred years ago? It's certainly a possibility and should at least be a topic for discussion.

Why this is being linked to "climate change denial" is beyond me.

[etherealtruth]

30. It is only trotted out by climate change deniers

Are you a climatologist? An Environmental scientists? A mathematician?

From the article:

A team of European researchers have unveiled a scientific model showing that the Earth is likely to experience a “mini ice age” from 2030 to 2040 as a result of decreased solar activity.

Their findings will infuriate environmental campaigners who argue by 2030 we could be facing increased sea levels and flooding due to glacial melt at the poles.

You do know this is NOT what the actual research concluded ....?

[philosslayer]

31. So if a volcano blows its top...

And there is a possibility that the earths temperature will drop as a result, it will only be reported by climate change deniers?

Lets repeat this slowly. There are short term changes (volcanos, solar activity), and long term changes (man-made activities). This is a discussion of a potential, POTENTIAL short term change. It has NO BEARING on the long term impacts of climate change.

The vitriol on this site is remarkable sometimes.

[etherealtruth]

34. Did you actually read the article you posted?

You request for information to be presented slowly .... t-h-e a-r-t-i-c-l-e i-s b-u-l-l -s-h-i-t

The article has been thoroughly debunked .... there are can be short term changes to climate, especially micro climate but that is NOT what this article is about. The research has not been debunked .... the false conclusions have

Yes, there is vitriol here when mis-information is presented. You will get the same reaction when anti-vaccine articles are posted, if you post "information" about chem trails .... http://www.naturalnews.com/037451_chemtrails_conspiracy_theory_geoengineering.html and expect a legitimate conversation.

[GummyBearz]

26. Its the long night...

Winter is coming for us all

[Phlem]

32. Oh my.

[TampaAnimusVortex]

33. Any prediction on climate past 40 years is myopic ignorance on display.

One variable never factored in climate predictions is new technology developments.

It is completely fair however to estimate that under current trends, by 2040 to 2050, we should possess advanced nanomachinery. Rather the world cools or heats, that technology alone will allow for control of global temperature. A thin layer of adjustable nanomachines in the atmosphere would give direct tunable control over the amount of sunlight to the planet (and probably even localized regions).

This doesn't even include the fact that nanomachines will use the existing carbon in the atmosphere to build massive amounts of things... roads, buildings, computers, etc... We already see primitive versions of this technology now. Google up "nanotechnology carbon".

Again, any prediction of the future that doesn't factor in exponentially accelerating technology curves is just silly.

[randome]

35. Professor Zharkova? Oh, the jokes he must endure!

[hr][font color="blue"][center]“If you're not committed to anything, you're just taking up space.”
Gregory Peck, Mirage (1965)[/center][/font][hr]