NASA admits that climate change occurs because of changes in Earth’s solar orbit

Swordsmyth

Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2016
Messages
74,737
NASA admits that climate change occurs because of changes in Earth’s solar orbit

For more than 60 years, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has known that the changes occurring to planetary weather patterns are completely natural and normal. But the space agency, for whatever reason, has chosen to let the man-made global warming hoax persist and spread, to the detriment of human freedom. It was the year 1958, to be precise, when NASA first observed that changes in the solar orbit of the earth, along with alterations to the earth’s axial tilt, are both responsible for what climate scientists today have dubbed as “warming” (or “cooling,” depending on their agenda). In no way, shape, or form are humans warming or cooling the planet by driving SUVs or eating beef, in other words.
But NASA has thus far failed to set the record straight, and has instead chosen to sit silently back and watch as liberals freak out about the world supposedly ending in 12 years because of too much livestock, or too many plastic straws.
In the year 2000, NASA did publish information on its Earth Observatory website about the Milankovitch Climate Theory, revealing that the planet is, in fact, changing due to extraneous factors that have absolutely nothing to do with human activity. But, again, this information has yet to go mainstream, some 19 years later, which is why deranged, climate-obsessed leftists have now begun to claim that we really only have 18 months left before the planet dies from an excess of carbon dioxide (CO2).
The truth, however, is much more along the lines of what Serbian astrophysicist Milutin Milankovitch, after whom the Milankovitch Climate Theory is named, proposed about how the seasonal and latitudinal variations of solar radiation that hit the earth in different ways, and at different times, have the greatest impact on earth’s changing climate patterns.


The below two images (by Robert Simmon, NASA GSFC) help to illustrate this, with the first showing earth at a nearly zero orbit, and the second showing earth at a 0.07 orbit. This orbital change is depicted by the eccentric, oval shape in the second image, which has been intentionally exaggerated for the purpose of showing the massive change in distance that occurs between the earth and the sun, depending on whether it is at perihelion or aphelion.
changes-in-earths-solar-orbit-and-axial-tilt-5.jpg

changes-in-earths-solar-orbit-and-axial-tilt-3.jpg

“Even the maximum eccentricity of the Earth’s orbit – 0.07 – it would be impossible to show at the resolution of a web page,” notes the Hal Turner Radio Show. “Even so, at the current eccentricity of .017, the Earth is 5 million kilometers closer to Sun at perihelion than at aphelion.”
For more related news about climate change and global warming from an independent, non-establishment perspective, be sure to check out ClimateScienceNews.com.
[h=2]The biggest factor affecting earth’s climate is the SUN[/h] As for earth’s obliquity, or its change in axial tilt, the below two images (Robert Simmon, NASA GSFC) show the degree to which the earth can shift on both its axis and its rotational orientation. At the higher tilts, earth’s seasons become much more extreme, while at lower tilts they become much more mild. A similar situation exists for earth’s rotational axis, which depending on which hemisphere is pointed at the sun during perihelion, can greatly impact the seasonal extremes between the two hemispheres.
changes-in-earths-solar-orbit-and-axial-tilt-1.jpg

changes-in-earths-solar-orbit-and-axial-tilt-2.jpg

Based on these different variables, Milankovitch was able to come up with a comprehensive mathematical model that is able to compute surface temperatures on earth going way back in time, and the conclusion is simple: Earth’s climate has always been changing, and is in a constant state of flux due to no fault of our own as human beings.
When Milankovitch first put forward his model, it went ignored for nearly half a century. Then, in 1976, a study published in the journal Science confirmed that Milankovitch’s theory is, in fact, accurate, and that it does correspond to various periods of climate change that have occurred throughout history.

In 1982, six years after this study was published, the National Research Council of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences adopted Milankovitch’s theory as truth, declaring that:
“… orbital variations remain the most thoroughly examined mechanism of climatic change on time scales of tens of thousands of years and are by far the clearest case of a direct effect of changing insolation on the lower atmosphere of Earth.”
If we had to sum the whole thing up in one simple phrase, it would be this: The biggest factor influencing weather and climate patterns on earth is the sun, period. Depending on the earth’s position to the sun at any given time, climate conditions are going to vary dramatically, and even create drastic abnormalities that defy everything that humans thought they knew about how the earth worked.

More at: https://www.naturalnews.com/2019-08...e-change-not-caused-by-suvs-fossil-fuels.html

Direct Link the Milankovitch article on NASA Earth Observatory web site - Part 1, Part 2 & Part 3
 
Yep
I was all on board with the climate change bul shi t until they said that the sun had no impact...I was out right then
 
Actually Earth's eccentricity is very small.

https://skepticalscience.com/Milankovitch.html

Because of eccentricity, the distance of the Earth at perihelion (point closest to sun) is slightly different than the distance to aphelion (point farthest from sun).

Earth’s eccentricity is very moderate, never exceeding approximately 0.07 (almost a perfect circle). The modern day eccentricity is 0.016, and as a result, the solar insolation that hits Earth varies by ~6.4% over the course of a year. There are some more extreme examples: Pluto’s eccentricity is about 0.25, higher than any other planet in our solar system. HD 20782b, a newly discovered exo-planet almost 120 light years away has an eccentricity on the extreme end of ~0.97 (similar to Halley's Comet). Eccentricity can introduce very large "distance seasons" on a planet, although this also depends on the thermal inertia, which is large enough on a body with oceans (or a dense atmosphere) to moderate the changes between perihelion and aphelion. As we will see, Earth's seasonal variations are primarily deterimined by its axial tilt rather than its eccentricity.
 
For such a hype filled post I don't see a single link to a NASA site that actually says what the post claims. Also I have never seen a credible science article about 12 years to the end of the world.

Yes, NASA admits solar orbit changes can affect the climate. :

We know subtle changes in Earth’s orbit around the Sun are responsible for the comings and goings of the past ice ages. But the warming we’ve seen over the last few decades is too rapid to be linked to changes in Earth’s orbit, and too large to be caused by solar activity

the current scientific consensus is that long and short-term variations in solar activity play only a very small role in Earth’s climate. Warming from increased levels of human-produced greenhouse gases is actually many times stronger than any effects due to recent variations in solar activity.

For more than 40 years, satellites have observed the Sun's energy output, which has gone up or down by only .01 percent during that period. Since 1750, the warming driven by greenhouse gases coming from the human burning of fossil fuels is over 50 times greater than the slight extra warming coming from the Sun itself over that same time interval.


https://climate.nasa.gov/blog/2910/what-is-the-suns-role-in-climate-change/


Looking for the actual NASA articles that says what the OP claims, I must have missed some link or two.
 
Irrelevant. Don't fall for Zippy traps. It doesn't change the amount of energy the planet receives.
No, but it does change the distribution and help cause the "weird weather" patterns that the climate liars claim proves man made climate change.
 
"For more than 60 years, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has known that the changes occurring to planetary weather patterns are completely natural and normal. But the space agency, for whatever reason, has chosen to let the man-made global warming hoax persist and spread, to the detriment of human freedom....NASA has thus far failed to set the record straight, and has instead chosen to sit silently back and watch as liberals freak out about the world supposedly ending in 12 years because of too much livestock, or too many plastic straws."


That is because they have been afraid of being labeled "racist." It was [MENTION=27246]oyarde[/MENTION] and his tribe that started this myth to tax the white man and get more funding for the Bureau of Indian Affairs.

 
I heard another interesting case for Cosmic Ray bombardment affected by sun cycles or sun spot activity. I think when the Solar Winds are stronger it holds back more of the Cosmic Rays.

Space 'weather' is probably the biggest factor, but green houses gases may contribute. I'm also not sure pointing to space weather means we should get excited and fully embrace dirty power.

Doesn't coal mining for example adversely affect the health of miners or the slurry runoff pollute nearby rivers?

Aren't there still extensive oil leaks from the sea floor in the Gulf?

For what it's worth, some are proposing a retooling of Nuclear Power to Thorium which is supposedly a better fuel in addition to the more well known 'Green' power sources. The case for Thorium over Uranium is that is safer to mine and creates less waste as well as not having an application for weapons.
 
Doesn't coal mining for example adversely affect the health of miners or the slurry runoff pollute nearby rivers?
I'm sure there are ways to deal with that.

Aren't there still extensive oil leaks from the sea floor in the Gulf?
Yes, the vast majority of them are natural.

For what it's worth, some are proposing a retooling of Nuclear Power to Thorium which is supposedly a better fuel in addition to the more well known 'Green' power sources. The case for Thorium over Uranium is that is safer to mine and creates less waste as well as not having an application for weapons.
There are many different modern nuclear designs that are much cleaner and safer.
 
This guy has a theory about why this would be covered up. I don't know enough about astro/geo-physics and cosmology to know whether this fear-porn or not though. I'd be interested in hearing other people's thoughts.

 
Last edited:
This guy has a theory about why this would be covered up. I don't know enough about astro/geo-physics and cosmology to know whether this fear-porn or not though. I'd be interested in hearing other people's thoughts.



Ya, a watched that before. And we are way over due!!!
 
Back
Top