# An Inconvenient Hypocrite

Discussion in 'Earth Science' started by madanthonywayne, Feb 27, 2007.

1. ### Buffalo RoamRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
16,931
James R

What do you mean? from what I see the blue line, Temperature, follows the red line, Sunspot Cycle, like a dance partner follows the lead.

3. ### James RJust this guy, you know?Staff Member

Messages:
31,670
Look at the axes on the graph. One of those graphs is upside down.

5. ### Buffalo RoamRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
16,931
James R , ? I think you need to cage your gryos, and get the right end up, pray tell which graph is upside down?

7. ### S.A.M.uniquely dreadfulValued Senior Member

Messages:
72,822
The left axis for the length of the sunspot cycle is an inverse one.

In lay language, the numbers decrease going from down to up.

In extremely lay language 11.0 is greater than 10.0

8. ### Buffalo RoamRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
16,931
samcdkey, thank you, all it means is that someone coppied the graph wrong and then missed the proof read, but still the blue line, Temperature, follows the red line, Sunspot Cycle, like a dance partner follows the lead.

9. ### Mr. Greality.sysValued Senior Member

Messages:
5,109
Maunder Minimum.

Really long sunspot(less) cycle, really low temperatures.

10. ### Buffalo RoamRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
16,931
The mean average income in the U.S. is 46,000\$, and ALGORVE spends almost that much on energy one house alone, he has 4, and he wants to buy indulgences to cover his carbon foot print, how about he just reduces his foot print off the backs of the common people, Le Grand Hypocrite, live as I say, you aren't good enough to live as I do. Carbon usage is carbon usage, by up the carbon offset, and move the garbage pile to another part of the room.

Last edited: Mar 2, 2007
11. ### Mr. Greality.sysValued Senior Member

Messages:
5,109
Just say, "Oops, my bad" and get it over with. They've got ya.

12. ### Buffalo RoamRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
16,931
Mr. G, Maunder Minimum, I know about that, read about it some were, I just didn't recognize it in the graph, and yes now it make sense, and I see that it isn't a proof read error.

13. ### Mr. Greality.sysValued Senior Member

Messages:
5,109
Unshaved, Gore even looks like Bigfoot.

14. ### Buffalo RoamRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
16,931
Harry and the Hendersons?

15. ### Mr. Greality.sysValued Senior Member

Messages:
5,109
'cause the graph doesn't include the Maunder minimum.

hehe

16. ### Buffalo RoamRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
16,931
Mr. G, but don't it show the corrolation? I haven't looked it up and it was a long time ago, or do I have something mixed up?

17. ### S.A.M.uniquely dreadfulValued Senior Member

Messages:
72,822
Mr G.

Are there any studies that do show a positive correlation between sunspot cycle length and temperature increase?

I remember reading somewhere that the inverse relation no longer holds due to human intervention? Or perhaps the relation is changed in some way?

Messages:
5,109
19. ### S.A.M.uniquely dreadfulValued Senior Member

Messages:
72,822

[/QUOTE]

You're confusing me with Messrs. Baffled & Wrong.

I have 500 level credits in Statistics.

http://www.isixsigma.com/dictionary/Positive_Correlation-769.htm

20. ### Mr. Greality.sysValued Senior Member

Messages:
5,109
Just say'n the graph I posted (AD1860 - AD2000) doesn't cover the period of the Maunder Minimum (late AD1600's - early AD1700's). Just say'n.

21. ### Mr. Greality.sysValued Senior Member

Messages:
5,109
500-Level Statistics vocabulary doesn't necessarily translate directly to 200-Level Physical Science vocabulary.

Now there's a negative correlation.

22. ### S.A.M.uniquely dreadfulValued Senior Member

Messages:
72,822
I can recognise evasion when I see it though.

Has the relationship between sunspots and temperature changed in any way since, let us say, 1970?

23. ### Mr. Greality.sysValued Senior Member

Messages:
5,109
And isn't playing hard to get an integral part of romance? To analogize.
Your original question was about solar sunspot cycle length vs temperature. The period 1970 to the present is less than two 22-year sunspot cycles -- too brief a sampling interval to answer your original question.