<div>I just discovered that I was named on a local blog, regarding my views on solar activity influencing Earth's temperature, in August 2008, as can be read at the website first below:</div>
<div> </div>
<div><a onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)" href="http://right-mind.us/blogs/blog_0/archive/2008/08/20/62455.aspx" target="_blank">http://right-mind.us/blogs/blog_0/archive/2008/08/20/62455.aspx</a></div>
<div> </div>
<div>I suppose I should ignore this. I'm inviting negative responses on the Internet or elsewhere, from some, perhaps. But given the results of my research into climate science is grossly distorted in this comment, and developments in global weather/climate in the approximately two years since this <a href="http://right-mind.us">right-mind.us</a> post are very relevant to the claim of a pending ice age, and the theory that solar variations are the primary driver of Earth's currently warming climate, I decided to respond here.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>The statement in question is in bold italic quotes below. Though my name is misspelled, given I have had brief exchanges with the host of <a href="http://right-mind.us">right-mind.us</a> on the subject of anthropogenic climate warming in the past, I assume I am the person referenced. There are a number of people named "Ted Moffett" in the US. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>I have no professional certification as a scientist, true, but the climate scientists I reference regarding solar activity have impressive qualifications. What "non-scientists" say about this issue is not especially important regarding the scientific truth, so I don't know why "other non-scientists" are mentioned.</div>
<div>
<p><strong><em>"Of course, Ted Moffet and other non-scientists with the church of global warming<font size="-1"><sup>TM</sup></font> say that solar activity has nothing at all to do with the earth’s temperature."</em></strong></p>
<p>I cannot recall once ever stating or writing that "solar activity has nothing at all to do with the earth's temperature." In fact, in a Vision2020 post in July 2008 (<font size="2">[Vision2020] Response To Right-mind.us Re: Global Warming & Climate Science:</font> <a href="http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/2008-July/055108.html">http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/2008-July/055108.html</a> ), explicitly answering some of the climate science claims on <a href="http://right-mind.us">right-mind.us</a>, I wrote "...I am not questioning that solar variations have influenced climate change in<br>
recent centuries."</p>
<p>Regarding the 2008 claim of a pending ice age within ten years, time is slipping away. </p>
<p>Since 2008, despite the deepest solar minimum in nearly a century, according to NASA, occurring in 2009 (read here: <a href="http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at nasa/2009/01apr_deepsolarminimum/">http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at nasa/2009/01apr_deepsolarminimum/</a> ), global average surface temperatures reached a new 12 month period record high, for the instrumental record, in 2010, given a 12 month running mean temperature, not calendar year, according to scientists at the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (read here: <a href="http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/paper/gistemp2010_summary.pdf">http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/paper/gistemp2010_summary.pdf</a> ; full paper<br>
here: <a href="http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/paper/gistemp2010_draft0803.pdf">http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/paper/gistemp2010_draft0803.pdf</a> ), with the effects of the 2009 deep solar minimum, that should have had a cooling effect. This development raises rather serious questions regarding the theory that Earth's warming climate over the past century is primarily due to solar variations.</p>
<p>We are now in new solar cycle 24 (read here: <a href="http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2008/10jan_solarcycle24/">http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2008/10jan_solarcycle24/</a> ), and depending on the magnitude, this should have some warming effect on Earth's climate.</p>
<p>Arctic sea ice volume and extent show a continued low in 2009-2010, with the volume reaching a record low in the 2010 summer season, and the 2010 extent the third lowest on record, continuing well below the 1979-2000 average, according to PIOMAS and NSIDC (read here: [Vision2020] Arctic Sea Ice Volume/Extent Sept. 2010 Update: <a href="http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/2010-September/071563.html">http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/2010-September/071563.html</a> ). The discussion of Arctic sea ice recovery of significance common on the Internet appears to be denying the facts. Though Antarctic sea ice has been increasing, this is no indication that in the Northern Hemisphere, or globally, an ice age is pending. Both the Northwest and Northeast Arctic ocean passages can be navigated this summer season (read here: <a href="http://www.wunderground.com/blog/JeffMasters/comment.html?entrynum=1589">http://www.wunderground.com/blog/JeffMasters/comment.html?entrynum=1589</a> ),</p>
<p>Calendar year 2010 global average surface temperature, according to NCDC, from Jan.-Aug., is now tied with 1998 for the warmest on record since 1880 (read here: <a href="http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2010/20100915_globalstats.html">http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2010/20100915_globalstats.html</a> ).<br>
------------------------------------------</p>
<p>Vision2020 Post: Ted Moffett</p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p></div>