5 ms·
That "solar activity" graph completely contradicts the graph in the article. I'll wait for better data.
by blindriver 3y ago
That "solar activity" graph completely contradicts the graph in the article. I'll wait for better data.
- ben_w 3y agoGiven the graph starts in 1880: I see you, like myself, are anticipating substantial life extension technology.
- GeoAtreides 3y agoAh, you're a tricky client! The article has a graph of sunspot numbers, not irradiance! So nothing contradicts anything, but that's not really important! We also have graphs of sun activity vs temperature! http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/thermo/solact.html http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/thermo/solact.htm... But wait! There's more! Here is a graph of sunspot numbers since 1880: https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/couldnt-sun-be-cause-global-warming https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/couldnt-sun... It doesn't feature the global temperature, so it's not perfect, we're sorry! We're very sorry! But it's clearly constant and doesn't exhibit the hockey stick shape of global temperature.
- cashsterling 3y agoLol... they match up fine for solar activity from 2012 to 2020. This sounds like: "the data doesn't support my thesis so I'll wait for 'better' data. What does 'better data' mean? Data that supports my thesis... thank you very much."