14 December 2010

Catastrophic, Anthropomorphic, Global Climate Change

First, the closest star is a main sequence variable; its output will vary.  Literally by definition.

Second, because of our proximity to this star, the climate will ever be in flux.

Third, that means that while the changes may, indeed, be catastrophic, they are very unlikely to be anthropomorphic.

I've said it for years.

I note that the coldest winter I can recall since I moved to the Gunshine State is occurring right after the sun made almost no sunspots for better than a year.

Either that or what recycling and carbon crediting we did worked beyond our wildest imaginations.

I'm still betting on the sun.

1 comment:

  1. I've made myself unpopular by pointing out that during the height of the "Global Warming! 'Tis Satan's work! We are DOOMED!" frenzy, I was reading things in the astronomy press that said the other planets in the solar system seemed to be warming, too.

    Darn that Dubya! Darn those no-good SUVs! They're so evil, even extraterrestrial planets aren't safe!

    ReplyDelete

You are a guest here when you comment. This is my soapbox, not yours. Be polite. Inappropriate comments will be deleted without mention. Amnesty period is expired.

Do not go off on a tangent, stay with the topic of the post. If I can't tell what your point is in the first couple of sentences I'm flushing it.

If you're trying to comment anonymously: Sign your work. Try this link for an explanation: https://mcthag.blogspot.com/2023/04/lots-of-new-readers.html

Anonymous comments must pass a higher bar than others. Repeat offenders must pass an even higher bar.

If you can't comprehend this, don't comment; because I'm going to moderate and mock you for wasting your time.