Comment: Can you explain better?

(See in situ)

Can you explain better?

I'm very curious where you got this information since everything I've read shows the opposite.

"The question is how much, if any, man has or can influence these climatic changes."
No. There is very little question of how much man is influencing these climatic changes.
Per Wiki on Global Warming:
"Naturally occurring amounts of greenhouse gases have a mean warming effect of about 33 °C (59 °F).[68][C] Without the earth's atmosphere, the temperature across almost the entire surface of the earth would be below freezing.[69] The major greenhouse gases are water vapor, which causes about 36–70% of the greenhouse effect; carbon dioxide (CO2), which causes 9–26%; methane (CH4), which causes 4–9%; and ozone (O3), which causes 3–7%.[70][71][72] Clouds also affect the radiation balance through cloud forcings similar to greenhouse gases."

"But whatever the contribution of man to climatic change, both the flow of currents you mention, and sunspot activity are major contributors."
Again, no. Current changes are a result of climate change and sunspots REDUCE solar irradiance, not increase it. From Wiki's Solar Variation:
"Changes in total irradiance

Total solar irradiance changes slowly on decadal and longer timescales.
The variation during recent solar magnetic activity cycles has been about 0.1% (peak-to-peak).[3]
Variations corresponding to solar changes with periods of 9–13, 18–25, and >100 years have been detected in sea-surface temperatures.
In contrast to older reconstructions,[39] most recent reconstructions of total solar irradiance point to an only small increase of only about 0.05% to 0.1% between Maunder Minimum and the present.[40][41][42]
Different composite reconstructions of total solar irradiance observations by satellites show different trends since 1980; see the global warming section below."

"Is it a coincidence that the current 11 year sunspot cycle is very anemic so far showing numbers well below normal and we are experiencing unusual cold?"
No to just about all of that. Solar irradiance is 1366 watts hitting every square meter of the Earth's surface. When it dips to its minimum, that's down to 1365.5 W/M2 with maximums at 1366.5 W/M2. When other factors are changing the planet's stable temperature by 70% of this potential by trapping more, how is a 1 watt input difference going to make any difference at all?

You also can't have multiple 11 year cycles reaching a low together. That would put them in sync and they would be the same cycle.

The biggest error is assuming that since YOU are cold, that the globe is colder. It is not. Did you know that while southern KY was ice cold yesterday, temps were above freezing way into northern Alaska at the same time.

You're being sold a bill of goods and you only need to read a little bit to learn what's going on. Big oil wants no climate change awareness while banks via governments want to co-opt climate change for carbon tax control over us. Neither has a damn thing to do with the science. That's a THIRD problem.