For topic:

Reward is a feature that we hope will inspire experts to answer important questions and make their answers available to everyone. It allows a sponsor to signal that they think a question is particularly important by offering a financial prize for established arguments that contribute to the establishment or refutation of the topic. A prize winner can keep the money, apply it to reward other questions, or donate it to charity.

Reward Name :
Reward Description:
Prize:
Closing Date:
Status:

Payout Rules:
The total reward is divided among all statements that were created during the period after the reward is offered and are established at the payout date.

The total reward is divided among all save events occurring during the period after the reward is offered that add one or more statements that change the status of the root and are established at the payout date.

Half of the reward is divided among all statements that were created during the period after the reward is offered and are established at the payout date and the other half is divided among all save events occurring during the period after the reward is offered that add one or more statements that change the status of the root and are established at the payout date.



Topic:

Reward is a feature that we hope will inspire experts to answer important questions and make their answers available to everyone. It allows a sponsor to signal that they think a question is particularly important by offering a financial prize for established arguments that contribute to the establishment or refutation of the topic. A prize winner can keep the money, apply it to reward other questions, or donate it to charity.

Rewrd Name :
Reward Description:
Offered By:
Prize:
Closing Date:
Status:

Payout Rules:


Conditions:


Topic:

Reward is a feature that we hope will inspire experts to answer important questions and make their answers available to everyone. It allows a sponsor to signal that they think a question is particularly important by offering a financial prize for established arguments that contribute to the establishment or refutation of the topic. A prize winner can keep the money, apply it to reward other questions, or donate it to charity.

Test string

TOPIC HISTORY

Will Anthropogenic Global Warming Heat the planet by at least .5 degrees C by 2100.



Statements

Statement Type Title Description Proposed Probability Author History Last Updated
CITATION Zharkova et al physics model suggests magnetic field of sun will be very low for next three cycles, likely cooling the earth

After studying full-disc images of the sun’s magnetic field, Professor Valentina Zharkova of Northumbria University and colleagues, discovered that the sun’s dynamo is actually made of two components – coming from different depths inside the sun.

The interaction between these two magnetic waves either amplifies solar activity or damps it down. Professor Zharkova’s observations suggest we are due for a prolonged period of low solar activity.

Professor Valentina Zharkova: 

We will see it from 2020 to 2053, when the three next cycles will be very reduced magnetic field of the sun. Basically what happens is these two waves, they separate into the opposite hemispheres and they will not be interacting with each other, which means that resulting magnetic field will drop dramatically nearly to zero. And this will be a similar conditions like in Maunder Minimum. 

What will happen to the Earth remains to be seen and predicted because nobody has developed any program or any models of terrestrial response – they are based on this period when the sun has maximum activity — when the sun has these nice fluctuations, and its magnetic field [is] very strong. But we’re approaching to the stage when the magnetic field of the sun is going to be very, very small. 

She suggests it could be a repeat of the so-called Maunder Minimum – a period in the 17th century with little solar activity that may have influenced a cooling on Earth.

Whatever we do to the planet, if everything is done only by the sun, then the temperature should drop similar like it was in the Maunder Minimum. At least in the Northern hemisphere, where this temperature is well protocoled and written. We didn’t have many measurements in the Southern hemisphere, we don’t know what will happen with that, but in the Northern hemisphere, we know it’s very well protocoled. The rivers are frozen. There are winters and no summers, and so on. 

So we only hope because these Maunder Minima will be shorter, the Maunder Minimum of the 17th century was about 65 years, the Maunder Minimum which we expect will be lasting not longer than 30-35 years. 

 

Of course things are not the same as they were in the 17th century – we have a lot more greenhouse gas in the atmosphere. And it will be interesting to see how the terrestrial and the solar influences play out.

http://www.thegwpf.com/new-solar-research-raises-climate-questions-triggers-attacks/ ;

Update: Zharkova is now predicting (11/2018) a cooling effect 2.5 to 4 times greater than the Maunder minimum: https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2018/11/winter-is-coming-super-grand-solar-minimum.html

 

1.0 Eric Details 2018-12-07 06:15:07.0
STATEMENT The ground-based thermometers are in ludicrous locations where they are subject to jet wash!

Below is shown the Rome airport Stevenson screen where they take temperature measurements to monitor global warming. This is not a typical. Also shown is the Burbank airport temperature station. Note the thermometer is surrounded by asphalt and subject to jet wash at 500°F in both official temperature recording stations.

 The fact that this is how they are monitoring the surface temperature indicates the lack of science in the whole field.

Fourth photographs and other  arguments against believing the predictions of warming see https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-07-20/global-warming-hysteria-record-heat-vanishing-sunspots-co2-lawsuits

 

1.0 Eric Details 2018-12-07 06:15:07.0
STATEMENT The earth's climate can be expected to warm by more than .5 degree C by 2100

The evidence established with at least 50% confidence that the earth's climate will be warmer by more than .5 degree Celsius by 2100.
(Note, although predictions of 2 degree warming are often seen, we are starting with the predominance of the evidence favoring warming of at least .5 degree to see first if there is a much weaker claim that can be rigorously established.)

1.0 Eric Details 2018-12-07 06:15:07.0
STATEMENT The evidence shows with at least 90% confidence that human efforts have caused warming of at least .1 degrees C over the last century

The evidence shows with at least 90% confidence that human efforts have caused warming of at least .1 degrees C over the last century.

1.0 Eric Details 2018-12-07 06:15:07.0
STATEMENT Back in the day polar explorers couldn't reach the North Pole overland because they'd hit open water. Antarctic explorers could set foot hundreds of miles further south than icebreakers can go today.

The first confirmed Overland trip to the North Pole was in 1968. It wasn't for lack of trying there were hundreds of expeditions. But dog sleds would hit open water. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Arctic_expeditions

 the early Antarctic explorers century ago were able to start their land voyage disembarking from ice cutters hundreds of miles further south than modern icebreakers can set expeditions now.

 Given all the evidence (for example the thermometer placements) that the surface data and all the old data is bogus these results seem harder fake and thus pretty good evidence it may have been warmer and certainly wasn't much colder a century ago or more.

1.0 Spinoza Details 2018-12-07 06:15:07.0
STATEMENT This Needs Proof. Please Add a Proof If You Know of One. Thanks. 1.0 Eric Details 2018-12-07 06:15:07.0
STATEMENT There is empirical evidence for cooling

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/09/28/nasa-the-chill-of-solar-minimum-is-being-felt-in-our-atmosphere-cooling-trend-seen/?fbclid=IwAR1g1NDILNljSUSKf-cgoHZ4Hb_Z24UFzwNbUsKY5T2w63NLjBeVXWNZf1o

 

1.0 Eric Details 2018-12-07 06:15:07.0
STATEMENT NOAA is revising the historic temperatures downward to make it seem like there is warming without justification

Here is some discussion: https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/01/11/noaa-temperature-fraud-expands-part-1/

Here is a more recent discussion showing that the temperature revisions are approaching 2.5°C: https://realclimatescience.com/2018/03/noaa-data-tampering-approaching-2-5-degrees/

Here is a survey from this year showing additional revisions downward historical temperatures and upward of current ones. https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/the-stunning-statistical-fraud-behind-the-global-warming-scare/

Here is discussion of how NOAA erased the freeze of 2017. https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2018/02/20/delingpole-noaa-caught-adjusting-big-freeze-out-of-existence/

Here is a congressional report featuring  whistleblower  recently retired senior scientist at NOAA's National climactic data center confirming climate fraud. https://science.house.gov/news/press-releases/former-noaa-scientist-confirms-colleagues-manipulated-climate-records

Here is a discussion of how NOAA issued garbage on modern Arctic warming ignoring many times when there was open water at the Arctic, such as shown by old newspaper clippings and the like. https://realclimatescience.com/2018/02/latest-arctic-fraud-from-noaa/

Here is a discussion of how similar shenanigans are going on in Australia as well: https://www.dailywire.com/news/19211/global-warming-hoax-exposed-australia-weather-john-nolte

 

1.0 Eric Details 2018-12-07 06:15:07.0
STATEMENT Independent audit finds temperature data fatally flawed

The first independent audit found all kinds of ridiculous mistakes in the temperature data, all of course favoring the global warming hypothesis. For example various temperatures are off by 25°C higher than any plausible temperature.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/10/11/bombshell-audit-of-global-warming-data-finds-it-riddled-with-errors/

 

1.0 Eric Details 2018-12-07 06:15:07.0
STATEMENT Nobel laureate lays out detailed case why the climate change even if true would be noise

 Nobel laureate physicist  lays out a detailed case why the claims of climate change even if true would be less than expected by noise. https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/nature/global-warming-is-all-fake-nobel-laureate-says-its-just-a-religion/?fbclid=IwAR1ILQ6jibefXba7-1kSe_-pu6JDsss2va4aG_vet9DT4tw5IboVMjQVkJU#.WaQQaNDTqDc.facebook

Other data showing the medieval warm period was warmer than today supports this view. https://www.spectator.com.au/2017/08/big-data-finds-the-medieval-warm-period-no-denial-here/

 

1.0 Eric Details 2018-12-07 06:15:07.0
STATEMENT The ocean circulation is weakening which also happened at the Maunder minimum

Scientists have reported evidence that the ocean circulation is weakening now and similarly weakened at the last Little Ice Age supporting the hypothesis that we are going into another Little Ice Age. In any case the ocean circulation is likely if it weakens to cool the northern hemisphere. https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2018-11/tuoh-oci112318.php

 

1.0 Spinoza Details 2018-12-07 06:15:07.0
CITATION The North Atlantic has been cooling since 2004

See the image and more evidence at the link.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/08/21/the-north-atlantic-ground-zero-of-global-cooling/
 

1.0 Eric Details 2018-12-07 06:15:07.0
CITATION Even assuming there was warming, how do you know it didn't come from solar activity impact on cloud cover

Solar activity has an important indirect impact on Earth’s cloud cover

The solar wind affects cosmic rays which affect clouds.
Even if the earth were shown to have warmed, how do you know this didn't account for it, not
CO2? But it is predicted the sun will have less activity in the future.
http://www.dtu.dk/english/News/Nyhed?id=b759b038-66d3-4328-bbdc-0b0a82371446
 

1.0 Eric Details 2018-12-07 06:15:07.0