[ RadSafe ] Global Warming, Sunspots...

Karen Street Karen_Street at sbcglobal.net
Tue Jun 26 18:03:12 CDT 2012

Absolutely the credibility of the authors is key. On one hand you've got not only the climate change community, you've got the communities of scientists who review their work, and National Academy of Sciences on top. NAS has issued boucoup reports. 

On the other, there is a letter from Seitz, who had dementia for a long time before he became interested in climate change, and is now dead. Plus a bunch of people, on the average still alive, who agree that the scientific establishment is lying, mistaken, not as intelligent, more venal, less moral. But no majority agrees on any single fact. They don't agree on sunspots, whether the Earth is warming, and what is causing it.

It's pretty clear from here. 

> Joe,
> Look at the coinciding overlay of sunspots and global temperatures
> (and the credibility of the authors) at www.petitionproject.org
> Sunspot heat is also much more common sense cause
> than miniscule CO2 greenhouse effect - 
> which follows so cannot cause the slight global temperature increase.
> Howard Long
> howard.long at comcast.net
> On Jun 26, 2012, at 3:35 PM, JPreisig at aol.com wrote:
>> Dear Radsafe:
>>    From:    _jpreisig at aol.com_ (mailto:jpreisig at aol.com)       .
>>    Sunspots have an eleven year periodicity.   See the book by Smith and 
>> Jacobs.  Sunspots are not driving
>> global warming.  Possible human effects --- yes????!!!  See also  my 
>> earlier postings about this on
>> Radsafe in the archives.  The effects are known in the geophysics  
>> community, but I'd be hard-pressed
>> to give you a book reference to describe Chandler wobble/Annual wobble beat 
>> phenomena and/or
>> beating of two closely-spaced Chandler wobble frequencies.   Geophysicists 
>> knowing about the
>> wobbles do write scientific articles about these phenomena.  People  like:  
>> Preisig, Dickman,
>> Eubanks, Dickey, Wahr, Gross and Chao, Smith and Dahlen, etc.  The  
>> articles are out there.
>> Pretty much, they aren't standard reading matter for your average health  
>> physicist.
>>    Wikipedia has some pretty neat listings about  fusion, fission, 
>> nuclear weapons, etc.
>> A Uranium fission weapon is described.  A plutonium  fission weapon is 
>> described.
>> A Teller-Ulam fusion (hydrogen) weapon is described.  Important for  health 
>> physics, yes???!!!!
>> Hiroshima/Nagasaki data are important for studying human health effects of  
>> radiation.
>>    By looking at Soddy's Box, can radsafe chemists  figure out what Soddy 
>> was up to, 
>> Chemically speaking????
>>    Regards,    Joseph R. (Joe)  Preisig, PhD

Best wishes, 
Karen Street
Friends Energy Project
blog http://pathsoflight.us/musing/index.php

More information about the RadSafe mailing list