Bs 5839 Part 1 2002 Pdf To Word

Overview For the second time this month, the sun has gone completely blank. On June 4th, the sun went completely spotless for the first time since 2011 and that quiet spell lasted for about 4 days. Sunspot regions then reappeared for the next few weeks on a sporadic basis, but are once again completely missing from the surface of the sun. The blank sun is a sign that the next solar minimum is approaching and there will be an increasing number of spotless days over the next few years. At first, the blankness will stretch for just a few days at a time, then it’ll continue for weeks at a time, and finally it should last for months at a time when the sunspot cycle reaches its nadir. The next solar minimum phase is expected to take place around 2019 or 2020.

The current solar cycle is the 24th since 1755 when extensive recording of solar sunspot activity began and is the weakest in more than a century with the fewest sunspots since cycle 14 peaked in February 1906. Solar cycle 24 We are currently more than seven years into Solar Cycle 24 and it appears the solar maximum of this cycle was reached in April 2014 during a spike in activity (current location indicated by arrow). Going back to 1755, there have been only a few solar cycles in the previous 23 that have had a lower number of sunspots during its maximum phase. The peak of activity in April 2014 was actually a second peak in solar cycle 24 that surpassed the level of an earlier peak which occurred in March 2012. While many solar cycles are double-peaked, this is the first one in which the second peak in sunspot number was larger than the first peak. The sunspot number plot (above) shows a clear weakening trend in solar cycles since solar cycle 22 peaked around 1990. While a weak solar cycle does suggest strong solar storms will occur less often than during stronger and more active cycles, it does not rule them out entirely.

Oct 15, 2002. BRITISH STANDARD. BS 5839-1:2002. Fire detection and fire alarm systems for buildings —. Part 1: Code of practice for system design, installation, commissioning and maintenance. ICS 13.220.20; 13.320. 12 &23, 3(50,66,21 (;&(37 $6 3(50,77('%. In accordance with BS 5839: Part 1, 2013 Fire detection and fire alarm systems for buildings – Part 1: Code of. In all cases the principles in BS 5839: Part 1, 2002 +. A2:2008:2013 Fire detection and fire alarm. Clear fire alarm zone information in „A4 Word‟ format, is to be provided in a suitable „clip frame‟ position.

In fact, the famous “superstorm” known as the occurred during a weak solar cycle (number 10). In addition, there is some evidence that most large events such as strong solar flares and significant geomagnetic storms tend to occur in the declining phase of the solar cycle. In other words, there is still a chance for significant solar activity in the months and years ahead. The last solar minimum phase lasted from 2007 to 2009 and it was historically weak. In fact, it produced three of the most spotless days on the sun since the middle 1800’s (bar graph below). Consequences of a solar minimum Contrary to popular belief, solar minimum is not a period of complete quiet and inactivity as it is associated with numerous interesting changes. First, cosmic rays surge into the inner solar system with relative ease during periods of solar minimum. Galactic cosmic rays coming from outside the solar system must propagate upstream against the solar wind and a thicket of solar magnetic fields.

Solar wind decreases and sun’s magnetic field weakens during solar minimums making it easier for cosmic rays to reach the Earth. This is a more dangerous time for astronauts as the increase in potent cosmic rays can easily shatter a strand of human DNA. Also, during years of lower sunspot number, the sun’s extreme ultraviolet radiation (EUV) drops and the Earth’s upper atmosphere cools and contracts. With sharply lower aerodynamic drag, satellites have less trouble staying in orbit— a good thing. On the other hand, space junk tends to accumulate, making the space around Earth a more dangerous place for astronauts. Meteorologist Paul Dorian Vencore, Inc. Earth temperature varies cyclically between warming and cooling.

Some of these “astronomical harmonics models” are: 9.1 solar/lunar tidal cycle, the 11.2 year Wolf sunspot cycle, a 20 year cycle, the 60 year Jupiter/Saturn Tri-Synodic Conjunction cycle, the 2000 year solar intensity cycle and the Milankovitch cycles of 26,000, 41,000, and 100,000 years. These cycles drive oceanic oscillations (PDO, AMO, etc.) and cloud formation.

The dominant cycle is the 60 year Jupiter/Saturn Tri-Synodic Conjunction cycle. When Jupiter and Saturn align, they change the solar system center of gravity, drawing the sun closer to the inner planets and warming them. This cycle has been traced back for years hundreds of years and thousands of years ago it was documented in Chinese and other records and pagan celebrations.

Federal-mandated diversity is great for lefty politicians but not so much for little girls: –The Obama-appointed U.S. Attorney for Idaho has taken the highly unusual step of intervening in a local criminal case involving an alleged sexual assault by juvenile Muslim migrants and threatened the community and media with federal prosecution if they “spread false information or inflammatory statements about the perpetrators.” WND and other news outlets have reported on the case involving three juvenile boys, two from Sudan and one from Iraq, who allegedly sexually assaulted a 5-year-old special-needs girl in the laundry room of the Fawnbrook Apartments in Twin Falls, Idaho. The incident occurred on June 2, but did not come to light until more than two weeks later when stories began to swirl on social media. The two older boys from Sudan were arrested on June 17 and released from juvenile detention less than a week later on June 23 pending further court proceedings.– •. Then I guess that the US military personnel that raped the Japanese woman needs to be snuffed out as well, correct? Let’s not forget all the military females that have been raped by their male counterparts as well. Let’s snuff all of them out as well, especially since the US military does not hold themselves any more accountable than the rest of this POS government!

Why don’t you tell our Saudi supporting government and all the George Bushes of the world to hold Saudi Arabia RESPONSIBLE for 9-11 then I will believe in the USA. USA of HYPOCRISY.

Classic statement, although we do have our own share of piss stains, I mean golden paint sploshes, on the white canvas. However, since the massive influx of these middle easterners and others began in such high numbers, the crap stains, I mean brown paint sploshes, on the white canvas are overtaking the golden ones! No culture is perfect, but their’s is certainly several hundred centuries behind!

More like jackasswards I’d say! Fight back America and Europe, don’t take this crap on your white canvas! Do you really think these people want to be in a society of haters? I apologize to each and every one of the Muslims, Iranians, Iraqis, Africans, and all the rest of the races around the world that our USA government is 100% RESPONSIBLE for the turmoil in their countries.

How many countries call other countries TERRORIST, and then go arming every terrorist nation in the world with the only thing the USA knows how to make and that is WEAPONS to MURDER innocent people for rich, white men and women’s greed. It SUCKS to be an American! I am waiting for the takeover by any country, can’t be as lame as the US government. The simple fact is that both generals Patraeus and McChrystal were sacked because they were suspected of having political ambitions – Republican political ambitions. Their “violations” pale into absurd insignificance when compared with Hillary’s handling of TOP SECRET documents, which are now most assuredly in the hands of the KGB/GRU and the Chinese intelligence services, both of which are now licking their chops at having Hillary the Hideous in the White House and under their full control.

“Hey, Hill, this is Vlad. How ya doin’? Hill, we need the exact grid coordinates of all your anti-missile sites, and I mean right down to the last centimeter. That’s right, every one in all the NATO countries and all the US sites. We also need daily updates on the locations of all your missile subs.

And Hill, the Chinese are buggin’ me about delivering the stuff to them as soon as I get it. Hey, Hill, I don’t give any s— about your upcoming congressional elections. That’s your problem – what the hell, you’ve got every 120 year-old black and Hispanic voting for you; you can handle it. Now I that need missile information, and I need it right now.

Actually, he retired at over 92% of base pay (new law allows 2.5%/year for time served up to 100% of base pay). Still, that equates to $169k/year, not $250K. Also, Snowden’s breach if FAR more serious than Petraeus. It’s one thing to give you mistress access to secrets (which, OBTW she had the clearance, just not the “need to know”) and dumping millions of pages into the public realm. And Clinton.we don’t know what was mishandled and may never. But TS/SCI photography doesn’t “accidentally” make it’s way from classified systems to a private, commercial server without human intervention. Sorry, but Tri-Care is not free, nor is Space “A”.

Shills like you spouting things you no nothing about because you never served makes you look stupid. His fine was NOT paid for by the taxpayer unless you consider EVERY dollar he made as a taxpayer dollar and that his service during that time was for naught. See, he served his country for 20+ years, EARNING every dollar he was paid. By working 12+ hours a day, sometimes for weeks at a time like the rest of us do and did.

And how do you know about his probation rules and whether he followed them? Did SOMEONE else tel you that to repeat like a good little shill???? How much of what you just spouted out was based on researched FACT and how much was just left wing bull-fertilizer hearsay?? What a baffoon you have turned out to be! Edward Snowden is a hero; and anyone that thinks less, is someone that is willing to give away every right we have as a human being, George W. Bush and Dick Cheney should be put into the photo. Then you would have a complete lineup (taking Snowden out of the picture) to stand before a firing squad for ALL their treason, lies, and terrorism.

Obama should be charged as the biggest war criminal in history. He is starting to make daddy Bush look like a choir boy. I know most are either too young or has the standard USA of amnesia syndrome to remember when Daddy Bush ran Iran Contra our of the VP’s office while Reagan slept or stuffed himself on jellybeans.

From Barack Hussein Obama on the topic of sunspots: “I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction” -Barack Hussein Obama, in his book, The Audacity of Hope, 2006 “Barack Obama was steeped in Islam. He knew a lot about Islam from his childhood. But he knew very little about Christianity.” — Rev. Jeremiah Wright to author Ed Klein, 2012 “The sweetest sound I know is the Muslim call to prayer” – Barack Hussein Obama, Cairo speech, 2008 “ISIL is not Islamic.” – Barack Hussein Obama, speech September, 2014 “The future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet Of Islam” – Barack Hussein Obama, United Nations speech, 2012 “We do not consider ourselves a Christian nation.” – Barack Hussein Obama, speech in Turkey, 2009 “The number of Muslims in the U.S. Your boast of emotionless center- right cyborgs in numerous positions of academic authority is an unsuportable assertion. The turgid rigidity of politically conservative thinking has blighted many lives, but seldom actually accompanies innovative scientific thought and accomplishment. Of course an admission that this is generally accurate by politically reactionary trolls of the sort on display here is not expected.

Would you like to extol the mindless presidential actions of G.W.Bush? I would enjoy further comic relief from the bunkers of conservative trolldom.

The sun is covered with elemental silicon, a good conductor of electricity. A sun spot is a hole in the surface that blasts energy and of course electricity into space.

Science as usual doesn’t know the cause of the sunspots though they can generalize. The problem for the Global Warming Freaks is that an empty Sun, as this article calls it, is radiating less heat which in theory would cause the earth to cool. Fortunately there is an offsetting mechanism called GCR or Galactic Cosmic Radiation. Serge Nubret Workout Template For Lifting on this page. This radiation increases as the sun weakens as spoken of in this article.

The GCR increases the cloud cover on the dark side of the earth helping the earth retain heat. (Cosmic Rays can cause saturated air to form tiny water droplets as in a cloud chamber). Even the UN feels that GCR may be one of the main factors in the fluctuation of the Earth’s temperature.

BTW ice ages seem to depend on our position in the galactic spiral arm, and not on CO2 content. Because it was linked on the front page of Drudge. Drudge readers are a very peculiar bunch. They love to congregate in comment sections and reinforce their far right, conspiratorial, ill informed opinions. Each upvote causes them to pat themselves on the back and makes them think they are right. It’s a lot of fun to watch. They say that liberals are dragging the right wing kicking and screaming into the future.

If you want to see the actual kicking and screaming, click on ANY Drudge story and scroll down. As an amateur radio operator for over 45 years, many of us have studied and understand solar activity because our overseas communications depend on the sun and its activity. There is something called a Maunder Minimum.

It has, in the past, brought on mini ice ages. Also, these idiots that a predicting numerous power grid outages due to massive solar flares are full of it. (No late night radio talk show hosts need to be mentioned.) We have not had any flares in months!

Yes, we have had disruptions due to solar winds. But the flares themselves have died away. So the scare tactic/clickbait in this article isn’t valid. So all said our star has a profound effect on the weather of all the planets in our solar system. Is that why we call it our “solar system?” Question for you all. Of Topic The jet exhaust trails over the last 15 years have visually changed.

They persist (do not evaporate) and during the day the sky fills with their expanded “clouds”. We can have a weather forecast of clear skys and by afternoon the sky is anything but clear. Why is it never mentioned the effect on climate this must be making all over the world??

The sun operates on a 360 year cycle with three phases: regulation oscillations, followed by a Grand Solar Maximum, followed by a Grand Solar Minimum. The last time there was a Grand Minimum was the Little Ice Age. The present phase began in 2009 with a new Grand Minimum now underway.

Prepare for decades of colder winters reaching a bottom around 2040. Along the way there will be increasing fuel shortages, food scarcity, disease and loss of life. Enjoy the warmth while you can. No amount of pithy CO2 increase will change this inevitability. We are peaked now at the warm part of the warm cycle of the 100,000 year Ice age cycles, Its a time when the weather hovers and changes more dramatically in our comfort zone, nothing to worry about except that Canada, Russia and and everything else above the 49th parallel is under a couple of thousands of feet of ice in a mere fifty thousand years from now. These are the good times folks, this report from one of the nations top notch geologists. Read the book “On the Trail of the Ice Age floods” by Bruce Bjournstad.

Its fascinating and makes for Great vacation planning! That’s the only way to round out what your imagination cannot stretch itself around. See it with your eyes. Tour it from Missoula Montana following the Columbia river and its surrounding flats and canyons down into Oregons wine country in the willamete vally and onto the mighty Pacific. You will know and believe.

All else is politics for the minions and idiots. I know thats a bit rough on some people but really, read the factual accounting of this planets ongoing records of climate change and please, turn GORE off when he gets on his global warming rants, they are abusesof reality for abuse of your pocketbooks. Its possible we will survive because of coal and coal alone.

A slight possibility but still a real possibility. Open your eyes, see the real thing, rocks dont lie! Follow the Columbia river from Missoula Montana to the Pacific Ocean for a great family journey. Courtesy of Great Flood Wines, inc, @ Great Flood Wines dot com, (currently in the shop for design changes). Winesdotcomm represented soon, floods, find the wines, learn the truth! We are peaked now at the warm peak of the warm cycle of the approximately 100,000 year Ice age cycles Complete junk science and nonsense.

First, we’re in an interglacial of the current ice-age. Second, the natural warming cycle peaked about 8 ka back and the Earth is in a natural axial nutation cooling orbital phase. Third, the planet is warming at unprecedented rates (30x natural) due to human induced CO₂ into the atmosphere. Fourth, we pay some very smart people to observe and research this phenomena. They don’t say that they are correct but they do have the best explanation for the evidence.

If they weren’t there’d be others publishing better unfalsifiable explanations and I’m sure there’ll be a few tweaks here and there but not the central theme. AGW predictions have all proven to be accurate care to share which one/one that the theory predicted that didn’t materialize? What do you think 30x natural means that is as clear as it can be to a scientist when discussing current extant and climate. It usually refers to the current ice-age.

Your warming trend is pure vacuity and any glimpse at the ice core data will show you how inaccurate your statement is. The planet is in a natural cooling cycle so the current warming is unnatural. Your last sentence is a non sequitur and basically meaningless. “Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing? The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying, Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us. He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision. Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure.

Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion. I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee. Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession. Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter’s vessel. Be wise now therefore, O ye kings: be instructed, ye judges of the earth. Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling. Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little.

Blessed are all they that put their trust in him.” (Psalms 2:1-12) •. Only an uneducated m0r0n who is obviously neither a scientist nor scientifically literate would be fooled by the fossil fuel shill Tony Heller (realclimatescience) who has never researched nor published one article about climate science using its given name or its pseudonym Steven Goddard. Heller/Goddard has had to issue several written apologies to NASA, NSIDC and NOAA for his pseudo-climate science alleging they were wrong over the years to avoid libel suits as he didn’t have the evidence to support his denier claptrap. The classic was he published an article titled “Arctic ice refuses to melt as ordered” in The Register on 8/15/2008. Goddard claimed that the NSIDC plot of the extent of Arctic Sea Ice was wrong. However, on 8/25, Goddard retracted his claim, saying that “ it is clear that the NSIDC graph is correct, and that 2008 Arctic ice is barely 10% above last year – just as NSIDC had stated.” Anthony Watts May 17, 2016 at 10:10 am “Goddard has no presence here after he failed to admit to CO2 freezing out of air blunder a few years back.” •.

The moon has the albedo of an ice cap, for one. It has month-long day and night cycles as well. But I’m sure what you’re”hinting” at is the moon’s lack of atmosphere, implying this is why Lunar surface temps differ from that of earth, ergo, climate scientists are totally legitimate in their study of earth’s atmosphere as it relates to climate. First, yes the study of earth’s atmosphere as it relates to climate is legitimate. My point is that, since it is by definition a secondary effect, all the data, knowledge, and understanding of it is worthless without an understanding and accounting of the Primary driver of climate, the Sun. Back to the moon. It has vast surface temp swings from day to night.

This is partly because of the two-week long day, followed by two weeks of night. It is also because, as you hinted, there is no significant atmosphere.

But a Lunar atmosphere would serve to regulate the vast temp changes, by acting as an insulator and causing dispersion. In other words, your “hint” demonstrates that atmospheric effects are dampeners, regulators, of extreme shifts that would be caused by the Primary. This is in direct opposition to the position of AGW proponents’ claims that atmospheric effects will be the cause of devastating shifts. Tl;dr: wrong argument bro •. What happened to runaway global warming?

Global warming scientists said winter storms would be a thing of the past and kids won’t ever see snow again. What about all those predictions that arctic ice would already be all melted and permanently gone? What happened to the dozens of hurricanes they said would hit the US coastlines every season?

What happened to all the predictions of accelerated rising sea levels? What happened to all the predictions of increased tornadoes, droughts, floods, disease, starvation, locusts.? Every prediction has been proven wrong. Is there anything that would invalidate their hypothesis? Do you always segue off-topic when schooled or lose a point? You have a long list of red herrings and straw man fallacies – a great indicator that the writer is a bull$h!tter! An informed person with integrity would state when prediction was made, by whom, and provide the evidence that it failed.

So far everything I have reviewed has been coming in worse than predicted. What did the first IPCC report predict how well has it fared? If you know the Q and A then it will be self-evident to you that you’re FOS. Cupcake you are making up stories again. As to uninformed it is evident that you have little science knowledge at middle school level. OMG, not this ancient trope again.

It was Frank Luntz, the Republican pollster, who advocated calling it “climate change” because it seemed less threatening. And the climate has indeed been changing over time, but not over the last few thousands of years, and never near as fast. And while CO₂ may have been a following indicator in the past, it is the leading cause at this time, as has been understood by atmospheric physicists for decades. I’ll ignore your opinion about taxes as it is not germane to the science. Science has no ideology. What bothers me more about the real morons who feed you this tripe is that we are launching ourselves into a new planet equilibrium that is unfriendly to our (human) and extant existence.

We are in an ice-age. Current warming has nothing to do with sun or solar cycles if that were true the planet would be in a long-term cooling trend thanks to the current axial nutation forcings and slightly cooling sun. You’re quite good at making up fairy tales. Unfortunately for you we know it’s the external forcing of human-induced CO₂ that’s causing teh unprecedented warming. Nope your science is awful. We are in an ice-age, period. We’re either in an interglacial or a glacial.

Climate has been studied for two centuries. The full theory of anthropogenic global warming was first formed in 1896. In the past 800k years or so orbital forcing factors (mostly axial nutation) would create shifts in temperature which would be greatly amplified by CO₂ being sequestered (cooling) or released (warming).

CO₂ was the feedback on top of nutation, so the both of them were the major forcing factor. Atmospheric CO₂ content is close to 0.041%, a miniscule swing of ±0.01% during the past 800k years with orbital forcing has taken the Earth in and out of glacial periods. Well glad to know you have more because so far you’re produced nothing but gibberish.

I can’t answer (1) because you keep this hypothesis untitled so who knows what you’re rambling on about except you, perhaps? (2) makes no sense at all unless you don’t understand how seasons come and go and that we have two hemispheres, and that there is a dynamic weather system. Maybe your science is so poor you don’t know how to express yourself. The current warming is entirely driven by the external forcing of human-induced CO₂.

I’m not sure you will be able to digest this but try Gillett et al (DOI: 10.1029/2011GL050226) who show the human attribution of the warming trend to be 102% of observed warming from 1851 to 2010 and 113% of the observed warming from 1951 to 2000 and 1961 to 2010 (averaged together).Take a very close look at Figure 1 which in (a) shows all forcings, (b) natural forcing only (declining trend i.e. Cooling), (c) GHGs only and (d) aerosols only (also declining i.e. But evidence that challenges the prevailing theory bores Kate Marvel, who brushes it off by declaring: “No serious scientist truly believes that the slowdown in surface warming invalidates greenhouse physics.” This is utterly superficial. The basic physics of the greenhouse effect are not the issue here. At issue is a whole series of more complex questions: whether the increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide is mostly attributable to human beings, whether that increase produces a large enough greenhouse effect to warm the planet, and whether any effect from carbon dioxide (which is actually a very weak greenhouse gas) might be offset by the enormous number of other factors in an extremely complex system. So to cite basic physics—a common trope of the warmists—is a glib and irrelevant answer.

Marvel goes on to assert that the pause in warming can be explained by “a massive increase in ocean heat content.” Well, all right, I suppose this is a plausible theory. But it is also a very new one—and only one of 52 different theories offered to explain the hiatus. The first time was all secret. When it was discovered, they first changed it back without explanation. They also recalibrated many of the surface thermometers in the early 2000s to create the appearance of global warming. Mann wiped out the Medieval warming period and the little ice age to create the appearance of global warming.

Did you not know of such things? Still can’t answer any questions. What would invalidate your hypothesis? (Still too afraid to state one?) (ans.

CO2 causes everything.)What caused all the historical periods of cooling or lack of warming while CO2 was rising? (hint, it’s not CO2!) •. You are not a skeptic you are a science denier. A skeptic understands the science whereas you’re clueless. BTW: true skeptics (scientists) have had 60 years or more to produce an alternate model and/or hypothesis to explain the unprecedented warming. Nothing has appeared in the peer-reviewed publications yet that was unfalsifiable. Your last question is not valid until you can show the data that has many decades of cooling.

Your first one is still not clear could you give the name of the hypothesis you want to discuss? Seems like you just ignored the excellent science paper I cited for you which would have answered your questions. To repeat: “No serious scientist truly believes that the slowdown in surface warming invalidates greenhouse physics.” This is utterly superficial. The basic physics of the greenhouse effect are not the issue here. At issue is a whole series of more complex questions: whether the increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide is mostly attributable to human beings, whether that increase produces a large enough greenhouse effect to warm the planet, and whether any effect from carbon dioxide (which is actually a very weak greenhouse gas) might be offset by the enormous number of other factors in an extremely complex system.

So to cite basic physics—a common trope of the warmists—is a glib and irrelevant answer. Read history. It’s full of stories like this: “The Arctic Ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer, and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot. Reports from fishermen, seal hunters, and explorers all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone. Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes. Within a few years it is predicted that due to the ice melt the sea will rise and make most coastal cities uninhabitable.” — from an Associated Press report published in The Washington Post on Nov. What hypothesis?

Why are you coy they have titles. I can’t guess which hypothesis you’re trying to articulate if you don’t spit it out. For example, the Attention Schema Theory (AST), developed over the past five years, suggests that consciousness arises as a solution to one of the most fundamental problems facing any nervous system: Too much information constantly flows in to be fully processed.

The brain evolved increasingly sophisticated mechanisms for deeply processing a few select signals at the expense of others, and in the AST, consciousness is the ultimate result of that evolutionary sequence. If the theory is right—and that has yet to be determined—then consciousness evolved gradually over the past half billion years and is present in a range of vertebrate species. You do know that the cooling we have experience over the last 16 years corresponds statistically much closer to sun activity than with CO2 emissions right? Your 2nd grade science teacher was right, the Sun warms the Earth.

4th grade science: when the Earth warms the hydraulic cycle incorporates more moisture to the atmosphere making more rain, reducing desertification, increasing plants, crops and habitat. 6th grade science: CO2 in the atmosphere is part of the great carbon recycling machine that is Earth. 8th grade science: Scientific method. In conducting an experiment or explaining a phenomenon, testing is critical. When a model is based on a hypotheses and it doesn’t work, either the hypotheses is wrong or the theory it is based on is wrong. 9th grade physics: Gasses, which do not posses the surface tension, may cannot retain heat within themselves. Water as gas clouds have special properties see 4th grade science.

10 grade biology: More CO2 along with H2O creates a special organic chemical soup that together with micro organisms and eventually plants leads to regeneration of soft fertile soils on the surface to further promote the phenomenon unique in our solar system known as advanced life. I would keep going, but it seems you couldn’t get past the 4th grade. My friend’s ask as to why I want to retire in Florida. They say that it is too hot. Yet I can pull up the temperature on my phone and show them that it is 92° here right now with 72% humidity but only 89° in Florida with 60% humidity.

Yet it was just snowing here 4 weeks ago. The winters are long and brutal. Your nose literally seals shut from the sub zero temps and it feels as if someone is whipping you in the face as soon as you walk out the door. Northern states should be deemed unfit for human occupancy from December to April. I wish that we could hibernate.

There are solar cycles? Why didn’t all the Global Warming fanatics mention that? Couldn’t it be that cycles in sunspot activity might have something to do with cycles in global temperatures? I used to think sunspots were cooler regions of the sun (because they’re dark, see?).

But after reading The Real Global Warming Disaster by Christopher Booker, I learned that sunspots are regions of GREATER sun activity. And that sunspots and cosmic ray activity have caused cycles in earth temperatures from time immemorial.

Democrats will now switch to “global cooling” as a big threat. Populated areas will freeze requiring mass migration or, more likely, mass immigration from the warm countries in the middle east, think Islam. Democrats will start taxing citizens for not driving enough and not driving fossil fueled cars because they are contributing to global cooling. Democrats will insist that coal be burned everywhere to stop the horror of global cooling. They will claim that global cooling will contribute to “hail stone” hurricanes and will propose taxes to erect large umbrellas over our cities to deflect the hail. No matter what the weather or climate democrats will tax it.

From the Scientific Journal Nature. Not qualified to explain the Theory.

But can give you the gist of it. An Astrophysics theory was recently confirmed by actual observation. It was peer reviewed, and accepted. The Sun is expected to exhibit unusual activity cumulating in about a decade. It is expected to last for three decades. Of course, the Sun may have other plans.

Anyway, if the Sun performs as expected the Earth will experience a three decade cooling cycle. However, nothing to presage an ice age.

The Climate Change people will love the consequences. These changes will not be predictable. They will impact on Regional Areas. As they progress prior changes will change again. The idea of Four Seasons will be in constant flux. When the Sun ends this cycle things will settle back down over a fairly short but unknown time period.

They don’t say but would assume the changes to be somewhat permanent or at least gradual. From the Governments point of view this is great. Can Tax every change, blame it on the worlds people. If not that then on Bush. Perhaps too Sarcastic? This will sure put a dent in the Global Warming scenario. First it was short memory, now lack of comprehension.

Are you going to just fade away? Well, looked up the notes.

Sure enough wrote down the particulars. But guess what not going to give it to you. Pick up the phone, call them, tell them what you are looking, ask for a reprint and pay for it just as I had to pay for the subscription. You are not only lazy but cheap. What other negative attributes do you have; sure there are many. You have got to be one of those inapt democrats! You have my condolences.

Now you accuse me of junk science? Engineers do not do junk science, nor any science for that matter. Want junk science? Look to the Global Warming and Climate Change idiots. Never a citation, never list qualifications, Never published in a Peer Reviewed Journal.

Not one Astrophysicist among the lot. Even the Farmers Almanack employs two and have a forecasting accuracy of 87 percent. Who denies Climate Change?

Any fool knows it will change with every breath. Who denies Global Warming? Been going in cycles for many millions of years. Who denies Global Cooling?

Nobody with more than two brain cells. It also cycles. So what is denied? The idiotic conclusions is a good place to start. A complaint is made against too much CO2. Well guess what?

It is real good for growing plants to feed a growing world population. The plants put off Oxygen which bind with other gases to help clean the air. People are blamed for Global Warming and Climate Change? Because governments can tax them.

Can’t tax the real villains; The Sun. The Inclination of the Planet to the Sun. The eccentric wobble of the Planet. Volcanic eruptions, Periodic changes in Ocean Currents. These are primary. Mans activity is but a pinprick in comparison.

I do concede I have been responding to someone border line retarded. Nice deflection to avoid a simple science citation. Your jejune, pleonastic, truculent jeremiad of junk science shows why engineers are not scientists and very poor at research. When will engineers realize that they are not automatically scientific polymaths?

Anyone in a physics department will tell you that an alarmingly large fraction of the relativity-disprovers, climate-deniers and other cranks submitting unsolicited manuscripts with bizarre theories-of-everything describe themselves as “retired engineers”. And to confirm your ignorance and leave no doubt as to your scientific illiteracy you make a classic science blunder about plants and CO₂. Lal Kitab In Bengali Language Pdf more. Obviously, you’re clueless to the biogeochemical, energy, landuse and temperature autotrophic drivers necessary for photosynthesis to occur. CO₂ alone does squat and too much decreases nutrient and protein yields in C3 and C4 vegetation.

Ever studied the PNL hypothesis? Obviously not here’s some science now go educated yourself: “Increasing CO₂ threatens human nutrition,” Samuel S.

Myers et al, Nature, May 7, 2014, DOI: 10.1038/nature13179 Projections for conditions under increased atmospheric CO₂ (drought) make this problematic for crops. In addition, research is showing that rice will not germinate at 35°C or above, and that many important crops become less nutritious when grown in elevated CO₂ levels. Consider the effect on agricultural productivity of the 2003 European or 2010 Ukraine/Russian heat wave.

Then there is the problem of pest migration due to warmer temperatures. It all adds up to a very murky picture for agriculture in the later part of this century.

That should make you less sanguine. Simply pointing out that it is the most accurate You’re either delusional or a liar or grossly ignorant. The satellite data measures the mid-troposphere through microwave radiometers, and is actually significantly more difficult to interpret than the ground-based observations. The idea that the satellites are some kind of truth-o-meter is really not correct at all. The differences between satellites and the surface are limited to those regions of the earth that have variable land cover – like SNOW covered areas.

The satellite algorithms assume a constant emissivity and well that’s just wrong. The satellite data are the MOST adjusted data we have. It is such an indirect measurement (more calculations) and a relatively new science, so it became and remains the most fudged. Or are you going to call it massaged? If massaged, then you’re going to have to admit that other data sets are correctly adjusted or homogenized and stop using denier terms. The rest of your comment is just pure bull$h!t and I must presume it is for the same reason you select to answer the above vacuity. Climate destabilization?

There have been massive “climate destabilization” events all through earth’s long geological history. No one is agreed on what caused them, except for the KT event and now, the Younger Dryas, which were caused by impacts of cometary fragments. Saying human activities are causing climate destabilization is blatant fearmongering, since humanity is clearly not hurling a 4 mile diameter slushball at earth at 40k mph, and that is the only known cause of such destabilization. I do find it amusing that people will produce and argue for results using data from non-scientific sources, and have to be dragged kicking and screaming to the primary sources.

Why on earth wouldn’t you start with the primary sources in the first place? Because they don’t support your false assertion?

There’s a plethora of published peer-reviewed science on the topic! Pro tip #1: Wattsupwiththat isn’t a science site. It’s a propaganda site trying to look like a science site, and failing more and more as it falls deeper and deeper into conspiracy theories and general crapola.

Let that sink in for awhile. The guy who has no science background and has been wrong about just about everything he ever published. BEST ran his “grade A” station at his request, and they show the exact same warming. Watts slinked away without honoring his declaration that he’s conceded defeat if they showed the same warming.

Watts has been wrong about ALL of his predictions, because he said the earth was cooling. And he was wrong about the stations and their overall reporting accuracy. He has no background in what he’s writing about, and it shows.

BTW: he is also with you deniers not understanding basic science. All those 11 cent words have just taken me down in defeat (not). And it is proof of one of the left’s favorite dodges. A flurry of words that essentially say nothing, prove nothing, but just allow you to get another post in. Because you believe he who posts the most wins. Climate theory as spouted by the hoaxers has failed to predict anything, but has been adjusted to explain everything.

We have not warmed since 1998, yet the claims every year are that we just had the hottest (fill in the blank ) ever. Being the energizer bunny of posters only makes you sad. And now you will insist upon the last word.

Did you Google Hottest Year on Record? Yes, hot air absorbs moisture from plants (making them tinder) and decreases relative humidity, thereby increasing the duration and frequency of droughts, and wildfires. It’s a game of statistics. That alone won’t kill us, but we are approaching the tipping points of Arctic Amplification (when the ocean absorbs more heat because it is a black body, compared to ice, which reflects heat), and the melting of the Arctic Permafrost (which is a HUGE reserve of C02) Ever been to Montana? In 5 years, Glacier National Park will be gone.

When this happens, and you you see a link on Drudge, maybe you’ll remember this moment and open your eyes. Yes, but those things can only be accepted as “real” after making certain metaphysical assumptions about the nature of reality. Because, as I said.we don’t actually know what reality is, or even if there is such a thing. Descartes illustrated this very well. “I think, therefore I am” is as far as one can get in determining what is “real”. After that, it’s all stacks of assumptions and guesswork. And yes, I was being pedantic.

I find that the best response to obnoxious elitism is a bit of calculated pedantry. Cooler weather is sure too follow and we head too the solar minimum 2020 or so!

Our magnetic field will shrink and weaken even more! Dire global warming folks will be saddened by the lack of accuracy of there computer models of C02 making it hotter again! Since that theory came out it CO2 has not been a reliable indicator so why not? The basis of Global warming is C02 but it has failed to track too the models consistently.

Bad Science is when politics involved, it appears the truth has been B.S. Weakest Solar Cycle in a century? Almost fell out of my chair. In case you haven’t been watching, this “11 Year Solar Cycle” theory is gone! Yep bye bye theory. In fact the past 2 “Cycles” have been completely out of sync.

There are no Solar Models able to predict Solar Activity with any level of certainty? The solar cycle was discovered in 1843 So tell me, what Scientist given the 4.5 billion years the Sun has existed would deem a cycle that has been tracked for 173 years to be immutable? The Sun has become unpredictable, and there is nothing they can do but let the press continue to report the existence of a Cycle that has dissolved before their eyes. To do otherwise would be to admit they lack the ability to predict solar output, thus they cannot say whether the Sun sill heat up for 10,000 years, or cool down for a thousand years. So why give money to attempt to do something about Climate Change when you have no idea what to do?

Contents • • • • • Scope [ ] BS 5839 Part 1 provides recommendations for the planning, design, installation, commissioning and maintenance of and for non-domestic premises. Recommendations for fire detection and fire alarm systems in domestic premises are given in BS 5839-6. It does not recommend whether or not a fire detection and alarm system should be installed in any given premises, nor does it provide any exceptions for non-domestic premises which are under construction. The term 'fire detection and fire alarm systems' is a fairly wide definition, including small systems whose field devices consist only of sounders and, to complex networked systems with a large number of automatic fire detectors, manual call points and sounders, connected to numerous networked control and indicating panels. BS 5839 Part 1 does not cover systems whose primary function is to control or extinguish fire (such as or ), but does cover the secondary alarm signal generated by such systems. It also does not cover voice alarm systems (which are separately addressed in BS 5839-8), or systems that integrate fire alarm functions with non fire related functions.

It also does not cover manually or mechanically operated notification devices, such as hand-cranked bells. The Estates publications HTM 05-03 Part B (in England and Wales) or SHTM 82(in Scotland) provide recommendations for fire detection and fire alarm systems in.

System components should comply with the appropriate family part, developed by as.