Scientists See Global Cooling Coming Due To Bicentennial 'Solar Minimum'

Some scientists say one thing, others say another. I recommend you read it all for yourself, whichever side you're on. I think this will give the Chicken Littlists reasonable doubt and perhaps make them stop being so hysterically extreme, like, say, David Suzuki, who's recently declared that we should throw politicians in jail for not doing what he demands.

h/t: Drudge Report

With some scientists saying one thing and others saying the opposite, who can decide which position to believe?

"Solar activity has overpowered any effect that CO2 has had before, and it most likely will again," Patterson says. "If we were to have even a medium-sized solar minimum, we could be looking at a lot more bad effects than 'global warming' would have had."

(...)

"The effects of solar activity and volcanoes are impossible to miss. Temperatures fluctuated exactly as expected, and the pattern was so clear that, statistically, the odds of the correlation existing by chance were one in 100," according to Hoover fellow Bruce Berkowitz.

The study says that "try as we might, we simply could not find any relationship between industrial activity, energy consumption and changes in global temperatures."

The study concludes that if you shut down all the world's power plants and factories, "there would not be much effect on temperatures."

The science, therefore, isn't sound, nor settled. Al Gore and the IPCC are just arrogant. They're playing ideologically extreme politics for financial gain. They haven't proven their claims; yet they expect us to submit brainlessly? What are we, fools?

See also this article in Popular Mechanics. h/t for that one: SDA