From: "Little@man.Ball" <suck@ra.mentos>
Newsgroups: alt.global-warming,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,can.politics,alt.politics.liberalism,alt.politics.democrats,alt.politics.usa.republican
Subject: Re: When Slapped Down Like a $2 Dolla Ho - Ski Bunny Surrenders
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2024 13:43:01 -0600
Organization: \@multiple personality phil hendry mind fuck@/
On Wed, 24 Apr 2024 12:19:05 -0700
Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
> On 2024-04-24 12:10, Little@man.Ball wrote:
> > On Wed, 24 Apr 2024 11:34:30 -0700
> > Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 2024-04-23 11:13, AlleyCat wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, 23 Apr 2024 11:01:34 -0700, Alan says...
> >>>
> >>> I Can't Believe This Guy Is Allowed Out of His House - Thinks
> >>> "Solar Activity" Is ONLY Sunspot Activity
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, 23 Apr 2024 09:16:28 -0700, Alan says...
> >>>
> >>>> "Solar activity"? You mean sunspots, actually, right loser?
> >>>
> >>> No.
> >>>
> >>>> Yet that's the image you presented: nothing but sunspots counts.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Nope. There are MANY passages in the videos that say "solar
> >>> activity" and NOT "sunspot activity" only. One video DOES say The
> >>> Danish Institute compiled a record of "sunspots", but that is NOT
> >>> the sole focus.
> >>>
> >>> Astrophysicists from Harvard University published the following
> >>> graph in the official journal of the American Geophysical Union.
> >>> The blue line represents temperature change in the Arctic over the
> >>> past hundred years and here is the rise in carbon dioxide over the
> >>> same period. The two are not obviously connected but now look
> >>> again at the temperature record and at this red line which depicts
> >>> variations in SOLAR ACTIVITY over the past century as recorded
> >>> independently by scientists from NASA and America's National
> >>> Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
> >>>
> >>> SOLAR ACTIVITY over the last hundred years over the last several
> >>> hundred years correlates very nicely on a decadal basis with sea
> >>> ice and Arctic temperatures.
> >>>
> >>> To the Harvard astrophysicists and many other scientists the
> >>> conclusion is inescapable.
> >>
> >> Except it wasn't "Harvard astrophysicists" (plural):
> >
> > Yes it was:
>
> Nope.
>
Prove it.