Look to the Maunder Minimum, a 400 year Grand Solar Minimum cycle that brings colder, more cloudy and unpredictable weather.

I stayed away from solar because of this fact. It wouldn't be prudent seeing how inefficient solar is and how much more cloudy the future will be.
A battery back up would be my choice; using solar, wind and at least another source to keep them charged.

Can't blame you for cashing in on the trend, in some parts of the country it will be valuable; in others, it won't help much but still, better than doing nothing to obtain at least some degree of self sufficiency.

The real data we have today does not support your untenable, irrational position. The real data exposes the fraud of the entire effort to manipulate and bias the data for the purpose of enslaving the people and destroying what is left of the free market.
Who pays you to come here and spread these lies?

"There's science and wishful thinking."
Unfortunately, you can't tell the difference, and you continue to support the anthropomorphic global warming lies. It's comical.

What evidence?

It's not a premise to a larger argument. Other people may use it as premise, but I am not here. I'm just accepting the evidence we have today.

"billions of dollars"
I actually agree with this. I suspect because burning stuff is associated with trillions of dollars of economic activity,there is very strong political pressure to get a certain, desirable answer. But I cannot make stuff up based on that. I have to accept the data we have today.

Not at all. I'm saying there's no great controversy. There's science and wishful thinking. It's almost comical to watch people outside their area with no understanding start with a desired answer and look for any anomalies that might make their wishes come true.

Unfortunately I always feel like I'm going to get a computer virus trying to read an article on Daily Caller.

Me dino thinks we should select a sacrifice to appease the sun god.

Gee, ya think? {sorry} It's perhaps a more complex issue than anyone -- including the so called climate scientists -- realizes.

I happen to own a solar company, so professionally, I suppose i'm solidly on the green side, but to me the green I'm after is the Greenback. I only got into the field because I saw an enormous potential to collect free money in the form of raw sunshine.

16 years later I wish there was a way I could put a pin in the discussion or just bury it. The climate changes. so what! Until the Alarmists can convincingly demonstrate what the CORRECT climate is, they can all go take a flying leap off the nearest cliff. I'm tired of arguing with them.

--In Liberty

Exactly the methods of mystics of religion,faith and politics. I do not accept the premise that humans can control climate change.

Enough people saying something makes it "true". Gore, Obama, Racheal Carter and the environmental zealots (to separate from just environmentalists).

It is very clear that the direct greenhouse effect of the greenhouse gasses is wholly incapable of changing the temperature as much as is asserted (perhaps the effect is consistent with the unadjusted data). The ONLY models that correlate include hypothesized effects such a CO2 increasing water vapor. These effects are not understood or physics-based. Any climatologist will confirm this, perhaps after obfuscating for a while.

Those that know, know that they do not know, but refuse to disclose their ignorance to preserve power. Just like churches...

But CG, you are not presenting facts or argument, just an ad hominem attack.

New theory. Sun is hot theory.

Worse than that. Michael Mann, of Hockey Stick fame, refuses to furnish his data to the judge in a lawsuit he himself filed. That puts him in contempt of court. The judge might now find his detractors were telling the truth all along. Those same detractors say this globe was even warmer in the Middle Ages than it is today. A lot warmer. Civilization survived that period; it will survive the worst that is allegedly happening now.

And Michael Mann is a dry-labber. So are his colleagues.

I don't dislike the 'facts'. I just find very few of them. Yes, atmospheric CO2 can trap heat. Much of the rest of the 'facts' are theories that haven't been demonstrated to track with reality. The data on actual temperatures has been heavily massaged by agencies that are the recipient of billions of dollars in funding to research "climate change" (no longer global warming). Even past records are adjusted to make sure that the graph looks the way it is supposed to. (Shades of 1984's Ministry of Truth).

just read that Greenland had the coldest july 4 in its history; -33 C.
I do lots of business in Alaska and so far this summer they are having the coldest summer in years. maybe this is all a tell tale sign of what is to come this coming winter. so much for global warming.

We still have the reliable 400 year climate cycle which will have the opposite effects of what the power hungry political delete are pointing us to, and drooling for profit at our misfortune.
A proper observation of history will ensure one will not be caught with their pants down.

I think you are correct! I've spent the last 15 years reviewing everything that I could find on the subject and have come to the conclusion that the climate is changing, has always been changing and will continue to change even if all humans are extinguished from the planet. I challenge anyone to provide data that has not been manipulated that proves differently.

I think the only debate is the one that comes when people don't like the facts they rationalize "at least be open to the controversy." This was the main argument for not teaching evolution for awhile: teach the controversy, teach the great evolution debate. LOL It's similar to the reactions of people who don't like the facts about homeopathy, GMOs, "organic" foods, the paranormal, etc. If you don't like the facts, turn it into a great "debate" or "controversy".