Inactive sun leads to prediction of colder winters

[confused2]

Again, that retraction is of another paper in March 2020, when the OP paper is August 2020.

Dead right. Well spotted. Two papers making unrelated claims about global warming - both retracted by the publisher for (what looks to me like) the same error. Starts to look like whatever garbage goes in she's going to get the answer she wants.

[Syne]

Again, that retraction is of another paper in March 2020, when the OP paper is August 2020.

Dead right. Well spotted. Two papers making unrelated claims about global warming - both retracted by the publisher for (what looks to me like) the same error. Starts to look like whatever garbage goes in she's going to get the answer she wants.

What it looks like to you is immaterial to whatever point you think you're trying to make here. You can either show the OP paper refuted or retracted or you can't. Anything else is only tangential, at best, and you're apparently intellectually dishonest enough to use that as an outright ad hominem to everything that professor does. You just seem that eager to dismiss her with a genetic fallacy.

[Yazata]

My reservations about the rather apocalyptic global warming hysteria is summed up in this post which I'm reposting here.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The evidence that I've seen indicates that since the industrial revolution in the 19th century, the world as a whole has experienced a net temperature increase of about 1.6 degrees C.

[Image: HadCRUT4.png]

That increase seems pretty small and doesn't seem to even remotely justify the "Extinction level event!!" rhetoric or the "Earth's on fire!!" hysteria that we so often hear.

It's also interesting to look at when these temperature increases appear to have occurred.

During the 19th century, Europe's "age of coal", temperatures seem to have remained pretty flat.

Then from maybe 1910 to 1940, we see an increase of about 0.5 degrees C. I'm just speculating, but assuming that it is anthropogenic, it might be associated with the introduction of the automobile.

Then from about 1940 to 1980, things seem to have been pretty flat again. Then a more dramatic increase of about 1.0 degrees C since 1980.

So what has happened since 1980 that might have driven the more rapid increase (in red on the graph above)? This was generally a period of deindustrialization in the Western world. Factories were closing everywhere and once thriving areas were turning into rust belts. (Britain once had world-class steel, shipbuilding, automobile and aircraft industries. Detroit used to be Motor City.) It was a time in which much stricter automobile emissions standards were introduced in the US and Europe.

Meanwhile, we see the rise of China and its rapid industrialization since 1980.

Yet most of the global warming activism never really addresses China. In the Paris Climate Accords, the West agreed to huge reductions in production of greenhouse gasses, while China didn't commit to any reduction at all. (They just agreed to try to reduce the size of their future increases.)

It's all about turning back the industrial revolution in the US and Europe.

[C C]

I believe there is climate change, but that it was also originally, incrementally exploited agenda-wise by those whose careers and profits it could directly benefit in politics, academics, entertainment, journalism, and business/industry (greenwashing). When "racial equality" and everything but the kitchen sink is being conflated with climate change, then you know that an ideology racket seized the opportunity, and is feeding its diverse array of ticks interdependents ranging across those enterprises.

I also agree with the now deceased Freeman Dyson that it's probably too late to do anything about it that would matter significantly. Akin to recruiting those Dutch boys to stick their fingers in the holes of the dike to thwart impending disaster. Much moral excellence posturing on the part of countries to say "look what responsible leaders we are" in the face of the looming menace.

There may be global warming, there may be a mini ice age, there may be a chaotic back and forth oscillation between two extremes. Regardless, as new diseases are unleashed from the permafrost and customer interactions with exotic "live" bushmeat, and masses of people die from flooding, super weather disturbances, water shortages, etc -- I expect Nature will right things over time by dwindling the extravagant number of resource consuming and waste outputting humans down over the ensuing centuries.

Or maybe convenient fusion reactors are finally here, to help mitigate the carbon theatrics. Or as Dyson suggested, maybe the change will actually turn out to be more of a boon than a negative, in the long run.