
July 11th 07, 02:50 PM
posted to alt.global-warming,sci.environment,sci.geo.meteorology
|
external usenet poster
|
|
First recorded activity by Weather-Banter: May 2007
Posts: 55
|
|
GW is not sunspots, solar cycle length, solar magnetic field, cosmic rays, or solar irradiance.
"Roger Coppock" wrote
The rise in the global mean surface temperature since 1985 was not
due to sunspots, solar cycle length, solar magnetic field, cosmic
rays,
or solar irradiance. These factors were all causing cooling during
the
period, if they were doing anything at all.
Please read this article and look carefully at the 6-part chart:
http://environment.newscientist.com/...l-warming.html
The original article published by the Royal Society,
if you're a member or want to pay for it, is he
http://www.journals.royalsoc.ac.uk/c...4264320314105/
This puts the fossil fool's attempts at astrology to bed.
There is a lag in climate response, direct analysis is therefore not the right way.
http://www.umweltluege.de/pdf/Gamma_...nd_Climate.pdf
This puts the AGW priests attempts at their dogma to bed.
|