On Tuesday, 21 June 2022 at 19:48:01 UTC+2, whit3rd wrote:
> On Monday, June 20, 2022 at 5:47:09 AM UTC-7, a a wrote:
>
> > Climate Change is an old fake by Al Gore, Prof. Mann and their team to make money fast.
> False, of course. Al Gore had some election-year lies aimed that way, and as for 'make money',
> all Mann got was some frivolous lawsuits. The court had his legal team's fees reimbursed
> by the jackals that brought the suit against him. The court did that because the suits
> were found to be 'barratry', rather than being serious complaints.
>
> > Freon is another fake.
>
> Not so; that's a DuPont tradename for fluorocarbon products, under worldwide ban
> due to ozone depletion.
> > Climate is clocked by solar activity and by fluctuations in solar activity.
> 'clocked by'??? Climate is affected by solar heat (influx of heat dominates during the day) and
> radiative cooling (heat dissipates into space, dominates the heatflow at night). The steady-state
> average temperature isn't proportional to anything the Sun does, but is set by the difference of
> those two heat flows (the difference is zero when steady-state temperature is achieved).
> So, your identification of 'solar activity' is only a half-truth at best, and in most literature,
> 'solar activity' only means sunspot fluctuations, not solar heat output. Indeed, the solar
> heat output is set by fusion rates in the sun's center, many thousands of miles away from
> the photosphere where we see sunspots.
> > So it's a waste of time and money to study Climate Change, living on the Earth, if you can easily study fluctuations in solar activity to get science on what really controls the Climate.
> Utterance of nonsense is detected. Agriculture, forestry, water resources, sea life are all being hurt
> by climate change, and gazing at Mr.Sun isn't a rational plan to deal with it.
you are completely wrong

We all Love Carbon
We all Love CO2

The balance of soil carbon is held in peat and wetlands (150 GtC), and in plant litter at the soil surface (50 GtC). This compares to 780 GtC in the atmosphere, and 600 GtC in all living organisms. The oceanic pool of carbon accounts for 38,200 GtC.
Soil carbon - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soil_carbon

Forest soils

Forest soils constitute a large pool of carbon. Anthropogenic activities such as deforestation cause releases of carbon from this pool, which may significantly increase the concentration of greenhouse gas (GHG) in the atmosphere.[24] Under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), countries must estimate and report GHG emissions and removals, including changes in carbon stocks in all five pools (above- and below-ground biomass, dead wood, litter, and soil carbon) and associated emissions and removals from land use, land-use change and forestry activities, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's good practice guidance.[25][26] Tropical deforestation represents nearly 25 percent of total anthropogenic GHG emissions worldwide.[27] Deforestation, forest degradation, and changes in land management practices can cause releases of carbon from soil to the atmosphere. For these reasons, reliable estimates of soil organic carbon stock and stock changes are needed for Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation and GHG reporting under the UNFCCC.

The government of Tanzania—together with the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations[28] and the financial support of the government of Finland—have implemented a forest soil carbon monitoring program[29] to estimate soil carbon stock, using both survey and modelling-based methods.

West Africa has experienced significant loss of forest that contains high levels of soil organic carbon.[30][31] This is mostly due to expansion of small scale, non-mechanized agriculture using burning as a form of land clearance [32]

--
I am really sorry, you represent low science - no science
but

GHG - greenhouse gas emissions is an old fake and political agenda developed by US politicians to kill China economy

but China mirorred the attack and turned himself into reduced emissions Global Factory
in green technologies like solar panels, wind turbines

Water H2O in its gaseous state, or water vapor, is the only greenhouse gas because of its high heat of vaporization

--

Climate Change is my agenda, developed and injected into UN agencies to let them nicely switch from Global Warming fake
into Climate Changes tautology by Heraclitus, everything flows, Panta rhei

It took me years to contact eco fools, funded by Putin and Kremlin to give up Global Warming fake

Putin and Kremlin injected $Bs into pockets of eco fools to boost sales of natural gas as green fuel

Today not a single $ slips into pockets of eco fools, so

my
Climate Change is clocked by fluctuations in solar activity Agenda
is backed today by NASA (Solar Lab) and others with public money, not coming from Russia.

If you still love Global Warming fake by Al Gore, UNFCC team, Prof. Mann,
I have nothing to say

But call Prof. Mann one day to learn, there is not a single piece of support for Global Warming fake in his Report, published by UNFCC and awarded with Nobel Prize

On Tuesday, June 21, 2022 at 1:39:46 PM UTC-7, a a wrote:
> On Tuesday, 21 June 2022 at 19:48:01 UTC+2, whit3rd wrote:
> > On Monday, June 20, 2022 at 5:47:09 AM UTC-7, a a wrote:
> >
> > > Climate Change is an old fake by Al Gore, Prof. Mann and their team to make money fast.
> > False, of course. Al Gore had some election-year lies aimed that way, and as for 'make money',
> > all Mann got was some frivolous lawsuits. The court had his legal team's fees reimbursed
> > by the jackals that brought the suit against him. The court did that because the suits
> > were found to be 'barratry', rather than being serious complaints.
> >
> > > Freon is another fake.
> >
> > Not so; that's a DuPont tradename for fluorocarbon products, under worldwide ban
> > due to ozone depletion.

> > > Climate is clocked by solar activity and by fluctuations in solar activity.

> > 'clocked by'??? Climate is affected by solar heat (influx of heat dominates during the day) and
> > radiative cooling (heat dissipates into space, dominates the heatflow at night). The steady-state
> > average temperature isn't proportional to anything the Sun does, but is set by the difference of
> > those two heat flows (the difference is zero when steady-state temperature is achieved).
> > So, your identification of 'solar activity' is only a half-truth at best, and in most literature,
> > 'solar activity' only means sunspot fluctuations, not solar heat output. Indeed, the solar
> > heat output is set by fusion rates in the sun's center, many thousands of miles away from
> > the photosphere where we see sunspots.

> > > So it's a waste of time and money to study Climate Change, living on the Earth, if you can easily study fluctuations in solar activity to get science on what really controls the Climate.

> > Utterance of nonsense is detected. Agriculture, forestry, water resources, sea life are all being hurt
> > by climate change, and gazing at Mr.Sun isn't a rational plan to deal with it.

> you are completely wrong

Okay, where? Zero details? It sounds like a lame excuse for a lack of criticism.
>
> We all Love Carbon

That's an odd perversion; diamonds are pretty, though.

> We all Love CO2

Live with it, yes; also a few other gasses.

> The balance of soil carbon is held in peat and wetlands (150 GtC), and ...

and temporary surface repositories are not part of the carbon cycle in the atmosphere versus Earth's
crust, because they can go either up or down (they're inbetween, available to burn or get buried).

> GHG - greenhouse gas emissions is an old fake and political agenda developed by US politicians to kill China economy

There's an agenda around it, nowadays, and politicians. The US can (and has) developed bits,
as have other nations; 192 of 'em if I remember the Paris Accords count.

> but China mirorred the attack and turned himself into reduced emissions Global Factory
> in green technologies like solar panels, wind turbines

It wasn't an attack. China is one of the 192 that joined the Paris Accord, and as you
say they're developing bits of their own agenda, as well as exporting bits.

> Climate Change is clocked by fluctuations in solar activity Agenda
> is backed today by NASA (Solar Lab) and others with public money, not coming from Russia.

Not true. Studied by solar scientists, yes; but what does 'clocked' mean? And, where's
the citation we'd expect of a result from the NASA Solar Physics laboratory, and (for that matter)
are you really convinced sunspot activity is relevant?

Anthony William Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote:
> On Monday, June 20, 2022 at 5:46:59 PM UTC+2, a a wrote:
>> BTW
>> Australia, Sydney is low on science due low population, not
>> attracting foreign scientists, researchers and low AUD exchange
>> rate.
>
> ...
>
> You seem to be pig-ignorant in a whole range of areas, not just
> climate science.

Given a a's nature since its first appearance here, and its absolute
stupidity, I suspect a a is actually one of John Doe's nym-shift names.
The two have about the same low IQ level and both are off-topic
disruptive trolls.

On Wednesday, 22 June 2022 at 03:58:30 UTC+2, whit3rd wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 21, 2022 at 1:39:46 PM UTC-7, a a wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 21 June 2022 at 19:48:01 UTC+2, whit3rd wrote:
> > > On Monday, June 20, 2022 at 5:47:09 AM UTC-7, a a wrote:
> > >
> > > > Climate Change is an old fake by Al Gore, Prof. Mann and their team to make money fast.
> > > False, of course. Al Gore had some election-year lies aimed that way, and as for 'make money',
> > > all Mann got was some frivolous lawsuits. The court had his legal team's fees reimbursed
> > > by the jackals that brought the suit against him. The court did that because the suits
> > > were found to be 'barratry', rather than being serious complaints.
> > >
> > > > Freon is another fake.
> > >
> > > Not so; that's a DuPont tradename for fluorocarbon products, under worldwide ban
> > > due to ozone depletion.
>
> > > > Climate is clocked by solar activity and by fluctuations in solar activity.
>
> > > 'clocked by'??? Climate is affected by solar heat (influx of heat dominates during the day) and
> > > radiative cooling (heat dissipates into space, dominates the heatflow at night). The steady-state
> > > average temperature isn't proportional to anything the Sun does, but is set by the difference of
> > > those two heat flows (the difference is zero when steady-state temperature is achieved).
> > > So, your identification of 'solar activity' is only a half-truth at best, and in most literature,
> > > 'solar activity' only means sunspot fluctuations, not solar heat output. Indeed, the solar
> > > heat output is set by fusion rates in the sun's center, many thousands of miles away from
> > > the photosphere where we see sunspots.
>
> > > > So it's a waste of time and money to study Climate Change, living on the Earth, if you can easily study fluctuations in solar activity to get science on what really controls the Climate.
>
> > > Utterance of nonsense is detected. Agriculture, forestry, water resources, sea life are all being hurt
> > > by climate change, and gazing at Mr.Sun isn't a rational plan to deal with it.
>
> > you are completely wrong
> Okay, where? Zero details? It sounds like a lame excuse for a lack of criticism.
> >
> > We all Love Carbon
>
> That's an odd perversion; diamonds are pretty, though.
>
> > We all Love CO2
>
> Live with it, yes; also a few other gasses.
>
>
> > The balance of soil carbon is held in peat and wetlands (150 GtC), and ....
>
> and temporary surface repositories are not part of the carbon cycle in the atmosphere versus Earth's
> crust, because they can go either up or down (they're inbetween, available to burn or get buried).
> > GHG - greenhouse gas emissions is an old fake and political agenda developed by US politicians to kill China economy
> There's an agenda around it, nowadays, and politicians. The US can (and has) developed bits,
> as have other nations; 192 of 'em if I remember the Paris Accords count.
> > but China mirorred the attack and turned himself into reduced emissions Global Factory
> > in green technologies like solar panels, wind turbines
> It wasn't an attack. China is one of the 192 that joined the Paris Accord, and as you
> say they're developing bits of their own agenda, as well as exporting bits.
> > Climate Change is clocked by fluctuations in solar activity Agenda
> > is backed today by NASA (Solar Lab) and others with public money, not coming from Russia.
> Not true. Studied by solar scientists, yes; but what does 'clocked' mean? And, where's
> the citation we'd expect of a result from the NASA Solar Physics laboratory, and (for that matter)
> are you really convinced sunspot activity is relevant?
every troll is free to contact NASA Solar Lab directly to get data on
- solar storn
- solar flares
- solar radiation
- sunspots

What is NASA's Parker Solar Probe?
NASA’s Parker Solar Probe will be the first-ever mission to "touch" the Sun. The spacecraft, about the size of a small car, will travel directly into the Sun's atmosphere about 4 million miles from the surface. Parker Solar Probe launched aboard a Delta IV-Heavy rocket from Cape Canaveral, Aug. 12, 2018 at 3:31 a.m. Eastern time.

==we'd expect of a result from the NASA Solar Physics laboratory, and (for that matter)
---are you really convinced sunspot activity is relevant?

https://sdo.gsfc.nasa.gov/

https://science.gsfc.nasa.gov/heliophysics/solar/

Overview

The Solar Physics Laboratory works to understand the Sun as a star and as the primary driver of activity throughout the solar system. Our research expands knowledge of the Earth-Sun system and helps to enable robotic and human exploration.

We develop innovative instruments and mission concepts, theoretical models, and techniques to access and analyze data. The Laboratory provides project scientists for NASA missions, assists with strategic planning and mission definition, and communicates research results to the international scientific community and the public.
Contact Us

General inquiries about the scientific programs at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center may be directed to the Office of Communications at 1.301.286.8955.

On Wednesday, 22 June 2022 at 03:58:30 UTC+2, whit3rd wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 21, 2022 at 1:39:46 PM UTC-7, a a wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 21 June 2022 at 19:48:01 UTC+2, whit3rd wrote:
> > > On Monday, June 20, 2022 at 5:47:09 AM UTC-7, a a wrote:
> > >
> > > > Climate Change is an old fake by Al Gore, Prof. Mann and their team to make money fast.
> > > False, of course. Al Gore had some election-year lies aimed that way, and as for 'make money',
> > > all Mann got was some frivolous lawsuits. The court had his legal team's fees reimbursed
> > > by the jackals that brought the suit against him. The court did that because the suits
> > > were found to be 'barratry', rather than being serious complaints.
> > >
> > > > Freon is another fake.
> > >
> > > Not so; that's a DuPont tradename for fluorocarbon products, under worldwide ban
> > > due to ozone depletion.
>
> > > > Climate is clocked by solar activity and by fluctuations in solar activity.
>
> > > 'clocked by'??? Climate is affected by solar heat (influx of heat dominates during the day) and
> > > radiative cooling (heat dissipates into space, dominates the heatflow at night). The steady-state
> > > average temperature isn't proportional to anything the Sun does, but is set by the difference of
> > > those two heat flows (the difference is zero when steady-state temperature is achieved).
> > > So, your identification of 'solar activity' is only a half-truth at best, and in most literature,
> > > 'solar activity' only means sunspot fluctuations, not solar heat output. Indeed, the solar
> > > heat output is set by fusion rates in the sun's center, many thousands of miles away from
> > > the photosphere where we see sunspots.
>
> > > > So it's a waste of time and money to study Climate Change, living on the Earth, if you can easily study fluctuations in solar activity to get science on what really controls the Climate.
>
> > > Utterance of nonsense is detected. Agriculture, forestry, water resources, sea life are all being hurt
> > > by climate change, and gazing at Mr.Sun isn't a rational plan to deal with it.
>
> > you are completely wrong
> Okay, where? Zero details? It sounds like a lame excuse for a lack of criticism.
> >
> > We all Love Carbon
>
> That's an odd perversion; diamonds are pretty, though.
>
> > We all Love CO2
>
> Live with it, yes; also a few other gasses.
>
>
> > The balance of soil carbon is held in peat and wetlands (150 GtC), and ...
>
> and temporary surface repositories are not part of the carbon cycle in the atmosphere versus Earth's
> crust, because they can go either up or down (they're inbetween, available to burn or get buried).
> > GHG - greenhouse gas emissions is an old fake and political agenda developed by US politicians to kill China economy
> There's an agenda around it, nowadays, and politicians. The US can (and has) developed bits,
> as have other nations; 192 of 'em if I remember the Paris Accords count.
> > but China mirorred the attack and turned himself into reduced emissions Global Factory
> > in green technologies like solar panels, wind turbines
> It wasn't an attack. China is one of the 192 that joined the Paris Accord, and as you
> say they're developing bits of their own agenda, as well as exporting bits.
> > Climate Change is clocked by fluctuations in solar activity Agenda
> > is backed today by NASA (Solar Lab) and others with public money, not coming from Russia.
> Not true. Studied by solar scientists, yes; but what does 'clocked' mean? And, where's
> the citation we'd expect of a result from the NASA Solar Physics laboratory, and (for that matter)
> are you really convinced sunspot activity is relevant?

read first
https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/sdo/main/index.html

We All love Carbon
We All Love CO2

CO2 is Plant Food
Plants are Animal Food
Animals are Human Food

On Wednesday, 22 June 2022 at 03:58:30 UTC+2, whit3rd wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 21, 2022 at 1:39:46 PM UTC-7, a a wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 21 June 2022 at 19:48:01 UTC+2, whit3rd wrote:
> > > On Monday, June 20, 2022 at 5:47:09 AM UTC-7, a a wrote:
> > >
> > > > Climate Change is an old fake by Al Gore, Prof. Mann and their team to make money fast.
> > > False, of course. Al Gore had some election-year lies aimed that way, and as for 'make money',
> > > all Mann got was some frivolous lawsuits. The court had his legal team's fees reimbursed
> > > by the jackals that brought the suit against him. The court did that because the suits
> > > were found to be 'barratry', rather than being serious complaints.
> > >
> > > > Freon is another fake.
> > >
> > > Not so; that's a DuPont tradename for fluorocarbon products, under worldwide ban
> > > due to ozone depletion.
>
> > > > Climate is clocked by solar activity and by fluctuations in solar activity.
>
> > > 'clocked by'??? Climate is affected by solar heat (influx of heat dominates during the day) and
> > > radiative cooling (heat dissipates into space, dominates the heatflow at night). The steady-state
> > > average temperature isn't proportional to anything the Sun does, but is set by the difference of
> > > those two heat flows (the difference is zero when steady-state temperature is achieved).
> > > So, your identification of 'solar activity' is only a half-truth at best, and in most literature,
> > > 'solar activity' only means sunspot fluctuations, not solar heat output. Indeed, the solar
> > > heat output is set by fusion rates in the sun's center, many thousands of miles away from
> > > the photosphere where we see sunspots.
>
> > > > So it's a waste of time and money to study Climate Change, living on the Earth, if you can easily study fluctuations in solar activity to get science on what really controls the Climate.
>
> > > Utterance of nonsense is detected. Agriculture, forestry, water resources, sea life are all being hurt
> > > by climate change, and gazing at Mr.Sun isn't a rational plan to deal with it.
>
> > you are completely wrong
> Okay, where? Zero details? It sounds like a lame excuse for a lack of criticism.
> >
> > We all Love Carbon
>
> That's an odd perversion; diamonds are pretty, though.
>
> > We all Love CO2
>
> Live with it, yes; also a few other gasses.
>
>
> > The balance of soil carbon is held in peat and wetlands (150 GtC), and ....
>
> and temporary surface repositories are not part of the carbon cycle in the atmosphere versus Earth's
> crust, because they can go either up or down (they're inbetween, available to burn or get buried).
> > GHG - greenhouse gas emissions is an old fake and political agenda developed by US politicians to kill China economy
> There's an agenda around it, nowadays, and politicians. The US can (and has) developed bits,
> as have other nations; 192 of 'em if I remember the Paris Accords count.
> > but China mirorred the attack and turned himself into reduced emissions Global Factory
> > in green technologies like solar panels, wind turbines
> It wasn't an attack. China is one of the 192 that joined the Paris Accord, and as you
> say they're developing bits of their own agenda, as well as exporting bits.
> > Climate Change is clocked by fluctuations in solar activity Agenda
> > is backed today by NASA (Solar Lab) and others with public money, not coming from Russia.
> Not true. Studied by solar scientists, yes; but what does 'clocked' mean? And, where's
> the citation we'd expect of a result from the NASA Solar Physics laboratory, and (for that matter)
> are you really convinced sunspot activity is relevant?

visit NASA’s Solar Dynamics Observatory
one day

https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/sdo/main/index.html

https://sdo.gsfc.nasa.gov/

On Wednesday, June 22, 2022 at 2:31:02 AM UTC-7, a a wrote:
> On Wednesday, 22 June 2022 at 03:58:30 UTC+2, whit3rd wrote:

> > ...where's
> > the citation we'd expect of a result from the NASA Solar Physics laboratory, and (for that matter)
> > are you really convinced sunspot activity is relevant?

> read first

> https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/sdo/main/index.html

No, not going to read an index... you didn't cite a single work, or result,
and that makes this an evasion rather than an answer.

Solar dynamics isn't significant heat modulation related to global warming.
Here's a picture from NASA
<https://climate.nasa.gov/faq/14/is-the-sun-causing-global-warming/>

On Wednesday, 22 June 2022 at 11:51:32 UTC+2, whit3rd wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 22, 2022 at 2:31:02 AM UTC-7, a a wrote:
> > On Wednesday, 22 June 2022 at 03:58:30 UTC+2, whit3rd wrote:
> > > ...where's
> > > the citation we'd expect of a result from the NASA Solar Physics laboratory, and (for that matter)
> > > are you really convinced sunspot activity is relevant?
>
> > read first
>
> > https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/sdo/main/index.html
> No, not going to read an index... you didn't cite a single work, or result,
> and that makes this an evasion rather than an answer.
>
> Solar dynamics isn't significant heat modulation related to global warming.
> Here's a picture from NASA
> <https://climate.nasa.gov/faq/14/is-the-sun-causing-global-warming/>
excellent, excellent
look again at your chart
Total Solar Irradiance values are fixed at 1361+/- W/m2 level

What matters is "Total"

Temperature increase by 1 degree C over the span of 100 years, as declared by Prof. Mann
is exactly within calculation/ data collected error.

What matters is Plasma Leaving the Sun and flares, clocking the Climate Changes on the Earth

http://sdoisgo.blogspot.com/2022/03/an-x13-flare-and-cool-view-of-plasma.html

https://sdo.gsfc.nasa.gov/

There is an only one scientist at NASA, Solar Dynamics, who can tell you the thruth behind the coronal loops and plasma leaving the Sun cycles

BTW
Ask your friends from NASA Climate
to ink image and comments with full name next time

https://climate.nasa.gov/faq/14/is-the-sun-causing-global-warming/

On Wednesday, 22 June 2022 at 12:25:11 UTC+2, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 21, 2022 at 10:39:46 PM UTC+2, a a wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 21 June 2022 at 19:48:01 UTC+2, whit3rd wrote:
> > > On Monday, June 20, 2022 at 5:47:09 AM UTC-7, a a wrote:
> <snip>
>
> > you are completely wrong
>
> a a does like posting claims like that. Since he is an obvious idiot, it is a waste of bandwidth.
> > We all Love Carbon
> > We all Love CO2
> Only those who are as brain-dead as a a.
>
> <snipped a large chunk of uncomprehended cut and paste which did say anything relevant>
> > I am really sorry, you represent low science - no science but
> Your sorrow should be directed at you own abysmal ignorance.
>
> <snipped more fatuous nonsense >
> > Water H2O in its gaseous state, or water vapor, is the only greenhouse gas because of its high heat of vaporization
> Water vapour - like gaseous CO2 - is a greenhouse gas because it absorbs and re-radiates specific near-infrared frequencies. Other molecules - like methane - that are active in the infra-red are also green-house gases.
>
> https://webbook.nist.gov/cgi/cbook.cgi?ID=C7732185&Mask=800#Electronic-Spec
>
> You've actually got to take the rotational modes into account to work out what the infra-red spectrum actually looks like, and get reliable greenhouse numbers.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Svante_Arrhenius
>
> had the right idea in 1896, but Knut Ångström in 1900 published low resolution infrared absorbtion spectra which appeared to show he'd got it wrong. When we finally got spectrometers that could resolve the rotational fine structure, Arrhenius was vindicated, but he was dead by then.
>
> The heat of vapourisation doesn't come into it
>
> <snipped more incoherent raving>
>
> --
> Bill Sloman, Sydney
as you can see,
Sydney is low science, making irrelevant claims

--> Water H2O in its gaseous state, or water vapor, is the only greenhouse gas because of its high heat of vaporization

<<Water vapour - like gaseous CO2 - is a greenhouse gas because it absorbs and re-radiates specific near-infrared <<frequencies. Other molecules - like methane - that are active in the infra-red are also green-house gases.

it doesn't matter
what matters is !!!!

Water’s heat of vaporization is around 540 cal/g at 100 °C, water's boiling point.

Why does water have a high heat of vaporization?
That is, water has a high heat of vaporization, the amount of energy needed to change one gram of a liquid substance to a gas at constant temperature. Water’s heat of vaporization is around 540 cal/g at 100 °C, water's boiling point.

On Wednesday, 22 June 2022 at 12:54:53 UTC+2, a a wrote:
> On Wednesday, 22 June 2022 at 11:51:32 UTC+2, whit3rd wrote:
> > On Wednesday, June 22, 2022 at 2:31:02 AM UTC-7, a a wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, 22 June 2022 at 03:58:30 UTC+2, whit3rd wrote:
> > > > ...where's
> > > > the citation we'd expect of a result from the NASA Solar Physics laboratory, and (for that matter)
> > > > are you really convinced sunspot activity is relevant?
> >
> > > read first
> >
> > > https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/sdo/main/index.html
> > No, not going to read an index... you didn't cite a single work, or result,
> > and that makes this an evasion rather than an answer.
> >
> > Solar dynamics isn't significant heat modulation related to global warming.
> > Here's a picture from NASA
> > <https://climate.nasa.gov/faq/14/is-the-sun-causing-global-warming/ " rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://climate.nasa.gov/faq/14/is-the-sun-causing-global-warming/>
> excellent, excellent
> look again at your chart
> Total Solar Irradiance values are fixed at 1361+/- W/m2 level
>
> What matters is "Total"
>
> Temperature increase by 1 degree C over the span of 100 years, as declared by Prof. Mann
> is exactly within calculation/ data collected error.
>
>
> What matters is Plasma Leaving the Sun and flares, clocking the Climate Changes on the Earth
>
> http://sdoisgo.blogspot.com/2022/03/an-x13-flare-and-cool-view-of-plasma.html
>
> https://sdo.gsfc.nasa.gov/
>
>
> There is an only one scientist at NASA, Solar Dynamics, who can tell you the thruth behind the coronal loops and plasma leaving the Sun cycles
>
> BTW
> Ask your friends from NASA Climate
> to ink image and comments with full name next time
>
> https://climate.nasa.gov/faq/14/is-the-sun-causing-global-warming/
in reply
to low-science Sydney:

SDO is designed to help us understand the Sun's influence on Earth and Near-Earth space by studying the solar atmosphere on small scales of space and time and in many wavelengths simultaneously.

https://sdo.gsfc.nasa.gov/

https://www.blogger.com/profile/16479620366654056823

http://sdoisgo.blogspot.com/

http://sdoisgo.blogspot.com/2022/03/an-x13-flare-and-cool-view-of-plasma.html

Blog Description
This is the Solar Dynamics Observatory Mission blog. It will consist of mission status, news, and event updates.