Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Study acquits sun of climate change, blames humans
Reuters ^ | Wed Sep 13, 2006 2:52pm ET135 | Alister Doyle, Environment Correspondent

Posted on 09/13/2006 2:01:24 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-103 last
To: JustDoItAlways
Because the less climate variability there has been in the past and the less solar variability there has been in the past, then the 0.6C increase of the last 100 years must be due 100% to increasing C02.

Your premise is wrong here. 30-50% of the warming from the 1900s into the 1930s is attributed to an increase in solar output.

And they never, ever want to bring up the 30 ice ages we have had over the last 3.0 million years.

That's not true. It's very important to understand the ice ages (particularly the Pleistocene glacial/interglacial epochs), because we are currently in a very stable warm interglacial period, and human activities are adding a component to the global climate system (atmospheric CO2) that will contribute to even warmer temperatures.

It is too bad that so many have fallen for it already. It is up to me and you and FR and others to get the REAL FACTS out, so start now.

First of all, try to get your facts straight.

101 posted on 09/15/2006 12:04:28 PM PDT by cogitator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: cogitator
Funny, I thought the article said:

This basically rules out the sun as the cause of global warming," Henk Spruit, a co-author of the report from the Max Planck Institute in Germany, told Reuters.

Then I thought the article goes on to say:

"Overall, we can find no evidence for solar luminosity variations of sufficient amplitude to drive significant climate variations on centennial, millennial or even million-year timescales," the report said.

I would therefore ask you to get your facts straight when you are quoting what the global warming crowd is saying.

102 posted on 09/15/2006 4:33:58 PM PDT by JustDoItAlways
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: JustDoItAlways
This basically rules out the sun as the cause of global warming," Henk Spruit, a co-author of the report from the Max Planck Institute in Germany, told Reuters.

He's referring to the current warming trend, which began in the mid-70s.

"Overall, we can find no evidence for solar luminosity variations of sufficient amplitude to drive significant climate variations on centennial, millennial or even million-year timescales," the report said.

I don't know how he assesses the Maunder Minimum.

Are You a Global Warming Skeptic - Part IV

"When climatologists run the fingerprinting analysis for different historical epochs, they find that temperature fluctuations prior to the Industrial Revolution were driven primarily by solar and volcanic forcings. In the early 20th century, natural and anthropogenic forcings seem to contribute equally. From midcentury onwards, greenhouse gases rule."

Now, there is one group at UCAR trying to downplay the early 20th century solar influence, but they haven't reached the level of full acceptance. The next IPCC report may be very interesting on this topic.

103 posted on 09/18/2006 6:48:49 AM PDT by cogitator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-103 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson