Discussion Group Issues
Bill Schrader Pavilion
15 February, 2016
12 noon to 13:30
D B C E A
A – An obscure 2015 article predicts global cooling for a decade based on sunspot analysis. It appears credible to the small scientific community that follows this work. The studies lead author, Dr Helen Popova, appears to dismiss Global warming research, “There is no strong evidence, that global warming is caused by human activity. The study of deuterium in the Antarctic showed that there were five global warmings and four Ice Ages for the past 400 thousand years. People first appeared on the Earth about 60 thousand years ago. However, even if human activities influence the climate, we can say, that the Sun with the new minimum gives humanity more time or a second chance to reduce their industrial emissions and to prepare, when the Sun will return to normal activity”. I argue below (1) that the global warming research remains valid, and (2) that were we to ease up on carbon abatement, we would emerge from a cool decade or so with unmanageable atmospheric carbon levels. My argument is based on my understanding of the warming science and suspicion that this paragraph is driven by Putin’s, not disinterested, warming scepticism. I like to think I can take it, so let me know if you think I’m wrong.
B – How are the Democrats doing? Any sign they might gain in Congress come 2018?
C –Trump told the Evangelical community that he would destroy the Johnson Amendment. This 1954 law prohibits churches and non-profits from raising money for, or endorsing or condemning a political candidate. If they do, they could lose their tax-exempt status. Do you agree with this expansion of free speech? (Mack)
D – Have you given up on internet security, yet?
E – Can NAFTA be amended to satisfy Trump without hurting Canada and Mexico?
Roger versus Popova
Dr. Popova’s startling prediction is based on the observation of deuterium in the Antarctic ice cap for the last 400 K years which apparently indicates sunspots variation. The Russian team worked out the sun’s sunspot physics behind the observed deuterium and got a remarkably good fit. Their prediction comes when they extended their sun model a few decades into the future. (I do not have a clue about the physics so you have to read the article.)
Dr. Popova dismisses carbon based warming because it had no role the last 400K years.
For the record.
1 NASA data for CO2 in the atmosphere based on ice bubbles in the same old ice pack.
No reasonable doubt that human carbon burning impact soared starting around 1900. It has jumped the 400K boundries.
2 – What has happened since humans started driving the carbon story
Pretty close correlation even to my by now unpractised eye and the text makes the point beyond any reasonable doubt.
So I am fairly certain that these new human-caused circumstances, like sun spots, can cause global warming. Thus, if the entirely separate sun-spot driven cooling mechanism restores some semblance of the good old days, unmitigated carbon dumping during the cool period will only leave us worse off a decade or so down the road.
So why the fairly dogmatic concluding paragraph. Putin, her boss, is a warming sceptic – in part, because, like Harper, he believes a big northern country can survive warming better than Tuvalu. He joined the Paris agreement, but with questionable numbers. He would be happy to see the world ease up on the carbon thing – i.e. sell oil and gas – for a few more decades. If Harper could turn Canadian climate research inside out for a few years, the same thing is child’s play to Putin.
Do you believe the new US Secretary of State from Exon understands this? Is politics everywhere?