And. incidentally, another clanger in the wake of your "I am...

First 769 Last

Share
Profile

Follow
madamswer

16,402 Posts.

7961

16/01/24

21:41

Post #: 71911663
Share

Originally posted by madamswer ↑

"SATIRE-T2SATIRE-T2 is an alternate version of SATIRE-T that employs a surface flux transport model (SFTM) to describe the evolution of the solar surface magnetic field (instead of the simpler model used by SATIRE-T). The input to the SFTM is still the sunspot number and total sunspot area. The model is presented by Dasi-Espuig et al. ( 2014, A&A 570, A23 and 2016, A&A 590, A63). (https://www.aanda.org/articles/aa/abs/2016/06/aa27993-15/aa27993-15.html)"

I don't believe you actually read that paper in full or if you did, you didn't understand it.
I, on the other hand did read it, and I did understand it.

And we've been through this already: "Reconstructed" historical information derived from models or simulations are estimates, which cannot be accurate to 0.03% accuracy in the Sun's luminosity, which formed part of the graphical ...uh... "evidence" you tried to palm off on the unsuspecting.

I really don't care to play the game whereby you keep shoving irrelevant literature my way when you don't understand it yourself (and in this particular case, your lack of comprehension means that you merely referenced something that continues to supports my initial argument).

"I accepted that whilst the "decline" is minimal over the short period of 60 years, at best you could argue that the TSI has at best remained unchanged, and therefore still offers no explanation as to recent warming."

Jeezus. Are you twelve years old?

To support your blinkered ideological view, you keep making these sweeping assumptions that have no scientific basis.

"... at best you could argue that the TSI has remained constant"

We've also already been through this.
No, you can't argue that. Not in any remotely scientific manner.

I used to think you were either being intentionally obtuse, or were simply not very smart.

No I'm thinking its a case of both.

.

Expand

And. incidentally, another clanger in the wake of your "I am going to go with the scientists" boast, the Astronomy and Astrophysics paper you submitted to the discussion concluded from its models that the solar constant has not decreased, as you were trying to argue, but has increased.

To wit:

It's laughable.

Do you not even bother to read the stuff you post on the internet?

.

Last edited by madamswer: 16/01/24

WHC Price at posting: $8.04 Sentiment: None Disclosure: Held
13 Upvote

0 Great analysis

Reply