Global temperature could drop 1.5 degrees C (3 degrees F) by 2020

[Stan Gorodenski]

Paul Cherubini wrote:

>Stan Gorodenski  wrote:
>
>  
>
>>The scientific accuracy of the article is highly in doubt. It begins 
>>with the statement Months have passed with no spots 
>>visible on its disc. 
>>    
>>
>
>Stan, the article was dated Dec. 4 so than means the author
>probably wrote it in November and no sunspots had
>been observed from July to November.  
>

Paul,
Whitehouse has been feeding you misinformation, if he is the source for 
your information. It is completely wrong that there were no sunspots 
from July to November. The SOHO web site at
http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/data/synoptic/sunspots_earth/
has sunspots that were _actually_ photographed on July 17, July 29, 
August 5, August 11, August 22, August 31, Sept 29, October 7, November 
8, and November 22, November 25. This is not an inclusive list. I just 
randomly sampled the files at the web location I gave above. Also, a 
count of sunspots can be found at
http://sidc.oma.be/sunspot-data/dailyssn.php
In short, there were sunspots in _every_ month Whitehouse claims there 
were none. Whitehouse is not at all a reliable source of information. 
Unfortunately, it is people like him that are causing a lot of 
misinformation. It seems pointless to carry on this discussion when 
right at the start the information on sunspots, the very basis for the 
whole article, is completely and absolutely wrong - and false, to answer 
your question below "What specific information is false?"
Stan

>So the article 
>appears to be correct in making the claim 
>"Months have passed with no visible spots"
>
>  
>
>>Whitehouse is obviously spreading false information 
>>    
>>
>
>What specific information is false? It appears to me Whitehouse's 
>claim of "months of no visible sunspots" was accurate up to the 
>end of November (just before the article was published).
>
>Back in 2004 Whitehouse published an article about sunspot 
>activity being at a long-time HIGH:
>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/3869753.stm
>
>"Sunspots reaching 1,000-year high Sunspots are plentiful 
>nowadays A new analysis shows that the Sun is more active 
>now than it has been at anytime in the previous 1,000 years."
>
>The bottom line for me is scientists are UNCERTAIN why the
>earth got warmer in the decades prior to about 1940,
>then cooled between 1940-1975 then got warmer 
>1975 to ~2000 and temps have been rather steady 
>2000 -2007.  So what the next 20 years may bring is 
>anybody's guess.  True, the concentration of CO2 in the
>atmosphere will increase slightly, but it also increased 
>slightly from 1940 -1975 and yet the earth cooled.
>
>Paul Cherubini
>El Dorado, Calif.
>
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------ 
>
>   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:
>
>   http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl 
> 
>
>
>
>  
>

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

   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:

   http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl