And I include a quote that seriously SERIOUSLY drives me nuts, because it shows such a lack of understanding of VERY BASIC SCIENCE.
To back that up, Huertas points to data that show that solar activity and temperature rose together from 1880 until 1960,
but that then, solar activity stopped increasing -- even as temperatures continued going up.
Read more:
http://www.foxnews.com/science/2013/02/ ... z2JxxO8ivZ" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
OK, this is so simple, that even a sixth grade class i taught last week understood it.
The oceans act as a huge store of solar energy in the form of heat.
In our annual cycle of seasons, the day that the northern hemisphere gets the most direct sunlight is around June 22nd. And the day that we get the least sunlight is December 22nd or thereabouts.
Yet, in the summer, days continue to warm EVEN AFTER THE PERIOD of highest direct sunlight, with days continuing to get warmer into July and August even after the "solar maximum". Likewise, temperatures continue to cool into January and February, even though the days are getting longer and the hemisphere is getting more direct sunlight.
This is because the ocean acts as a buufer and absorbs radiant energy as air temperatures are warmer and releases energy as they are colder, effectively shifting the seasons that we experience by one or two months.
In the same way, the ocean acts as a CLIMATE buffer. Just like the above, as solar output waxes over decades, the oceans are net storing energy. Then as solar output wanes, the oceans net release energy, and thus the temperatures continue to rise or hold steady for years longer than would be expected if you are trying to make a direct correlation between temperature and solar output.
These guys are either stupid, or they intentionally omit this fact and/or leave it out of their computer models. It's why the environmentalists are constantly caught with eqq on their face when they predicted a coming ice age in the 70s, and as they will with the current warming scare as well. The alarming thing is that now the new term is neither warming nor cooling but "weather extremes". Of course, my suspicion is that what causes the extremes is that they treat one "problem" (for instance using contrails to curb "warming) and then when the cycle naturally goes the other way, all of the effects of what they did to stop the warming then pushes to a further extreme swing to the cold side. And of course, the ultimate goal is more control and the ability to tax globally to combat these GOVERNMENT CREATED problems.
Gah! All worked up now! X(