It might have been better if you'd supplied some of those words, because that picture doesn't appear to me to indicate anything on the way as major as the Dalton, let alone the Maunder, minimum.
> As the Sun ages [...]
Yeah, oddly enough that isn't what I was questioning. You made two claims that are just flatly wrong. (1) That the sun is going to go supernova. Nope, not happening. Wrong sort of star. (2) That increases in the sun's temperature on its way to this alleged supernova are "what alot of the global warming fear is based on". The sun's temperature and luminosity aren't going to change appreciably on a timescale shorter than many million years.
> The IPCC were hacked and exposed.
What?
(Are you mixing up the IPCC with the UEA CRU? The two are entirely different, and the hacks didn't "expose" anything to speak of.)
It might have been better if you'd supplied some of those words, because that picture doesn't appear to me to indicate anything on the way as major as the Dalton, let alone the Maunder, minimum.
> As the Sun ages [...]
Yeah, oddly enough that isn't what I was questioning. You made two claims that are just flatly wrong. (1) That the sun is going to go supernova. Nope, not happening. Wrong sort of star. (2) That increases in the sun's temperature on its way to this alleged supernova are "what alot of the global warming fear is based on". The sun's temperature and luminosity aren't going to change appreciably on a timescale shorter than many million years.
> The IPCC were hacked and exposed.
What?
(Are you mixing up the IPCC with the UEA CRU? The two are entirely different, and the hacks didn't "expose" anything to speak of.)