Phhhbt! to Algore and his Globull Worming fraud. There are two articles in the news today that oppose the global warming acolytes. First item is that this Spring has been the coldest on record since 1975—well before the start of the so-called warming, and, coincidentally, both periods were at the bottom of the 11-year sun spot cycle.
The second item appeared in reports from Russian researchers monitoring Arctic sea ice. Instead of growing thinner as claimed by global warming frauds, it isn’t.
“Journalists say the entire process is very simple: once solar activity declines, the temperature drops. But besides solar activity, the climate is influenced by other factors, including the lithosphere, the atmosphere, the ocean, the glaciers. The share of solar activity in climate change is only 20%. This means that sun’s activity could trigger certain changes whereas the actual climate changing process takes place on the Earth”.
Solar activity follows different cycles, including an 11-year cycle, a 90-year cycle and a 200-year cycle. Yuri Nagovitsyn comments.
“Evidently, solar activity is on the decrease. The 11-year cycle doesn’t bring about considerable climate change – only 1-2%. The impact of the 200-year cycle is greater – up to 50%. In this respect, we could be in for a cooling period that lasts 200-250 years. The period of low solar activity could start in 2030-2040 but it won’t be as pervasive as in the late 17th century”. — The Global Warming Policy Foundation.
It appears that the solar cycles have more to do with the earth’s temperature than any man-made activity. The 11-year cycle is well known. It directly affects radio/TV transmissions. At its peak, broadcast TV stations have far greater range than usual. Amateur radio operators know these cycles well. The troughs, however, when sun spot activity is low, TV/radio transmissions have much less range—and the weather is often much cooler as well.
What is coming, is multiple cycles bottoming, the 11-year cycle, the 90-year cycle and the 200-year cycle, at the same time. When the convergence of those cycles happened last, about 400 years ago, the period was known as the Little Ice Age.
Hey, Algore! Real science will always beat pseudo-science. You can only fool libs all the time.
Another item in the news today is now many Americans now fear or mistrust their government. Fox News published a poll recently that surprised many. To some, the poll was a confirmation of viewpoints wide spread across the country but never reported by the media. While this is reported on the WND website, the data is from FOX.
Americans fear government more than terror
Astonishing poll results for 1st time since 9/11 hijackings
According to a pair of recent polls, for the first time since the 9/11 terrorist hijackings, Americans are more fearful their government will abuse constitutional liberties than fail to keep its citizens safe.
A Fox News survey polling a random national sample of 619 registered voters the day after the bombing found despite the tragic event, those interviewed responded very differently than following 9/11.
For the first time since a similar question was asked in May 2001, more Americans answered “no” to the question, “Would you be willing to give up some of your personal freedom in order to reduce the threat of terrorism?”
Of those surveyed on April 16, 2013, 45 percent answered no to the question, compared to 43 percent answering yes.
In May 2001, before 9/11, the balance was similar, with 40 percent answering no to 33 percent answering yes.
But following the terrorist attacks of 9/11, the numbers flipped dramatically, to 71 percent agreeing to sacrifice personal freedom to reduce the threat of terrorism.
Subsequent polls asking the same question in 2002, 2005 and 2006 found Americans consistently willing to give up freedom in exchange for security. Yet the numbers were declining from 71 percent following 9/11 to only 54 percent by May 2006.
Now, it would seem, the famous quote widely attributed to Benjamin Franklin – “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety” – is holding more sway with Americans than it has in over a dozen years.
A similar poll sampling 588 adults, conducted on April 17 and 18 for the Washington Post, also discovered the change in attitude.
“Which worries you more,” the Post asked, “that the government will not go far enough to investigate terrorism because of concerns about constitutional rights, or that it will go too far in compromising constitutional rights in order to investigate terrorism?”
The poll found 48 percent of respondents worry the government will go too far, compared to 41 percent who worry it won’t go far enough.
And similar to the Fox News poll, the Post found the worry to be a fresh development, as only 44 percent worried the government would go too far in January 2006 and only 27 percent worried the government would go too far in January 2010.
The Fox News poll was unique in that it further broke the responses down by political affiliation:
Bucking the trend, 51 percent of Democrats responded they would give up personal freedom to reduce the threat of terror, compared to 36 percent opposed.
Forty-seven percent of Republicans, on the other hand, opposed giving up freedoms, compared to only 43 percent in favor.
Yet independents were the most resistant, with only 29 percent willing to sacrifice freedom, while 58 percent stood opposed.
I’m not surprised all that much with the results of this poll. It mirrors sentiment I’ve observed over the last decade. The most tragic datum in the poll is this: 51 percent of Democrats responded they would give up personal freedom to reduce the threat of terror. We saw this in Boston where the populace gave up their 4th and 1st Amendment rights in the search for the remaining bomber. He was eventually found—outside of the search area by a resident who WASN’T quivering inside his home as ordered by the State.
The divide across the country continues to grow. The statists, those who depend on government for their security—economic, physical and political security, are content to give up their liberty. In past centuries, we called them subjects, peons and serfs.
Then, there are the rest of us who, for the most part, are the antithesis of those who would submit.