Global Warming Theorists: climate change may indeed be caused by the Sun, so global warming may be unproved??

Question

To all those that believe Global Warming is the cause of the change, here is something to undermine that. read this and get back to me.

see liberals, this is how you learn information by research!


http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/features.cfm?feature=1319

Answer 1

The key word in your sub-heading is "believe". The global warming theorists have become so rabid in their belief of global warming that they attack ANYONE who finds evidence to the contrary. It only makes their own case less credible. I am old enough to remember the "ice age" hysteria of the 70's. It is all designed to extract more money from taxpayers and energy consumers.

Answer 2

I am all for reasonable efforts to protect the environment. The groups that are heavily into global warming though have an additional agenda...that of crippling free market capitalism world wide. That is what the Kyoto treaty is all about even though everyone knows that if fully implimented with all countries signing on, the amount of CO-2 content reduction in our atmosphere as a percentage of the whole atmosphere would be miniscule.

It is also not widely known that the percent of ALL CO-2 as a percent of our entire atmosphere is miniscule and that the amount of increase of CO-2 in the atmosphere is but a very tiny fraction of the entire amount of CO-2.

While you can present numbers measuring the amount of CO-2 in the atmosphere and the amount of increase in such a way as to make it seem HUGE, the fact remains that if the entire atmosphere were a 100 yd football field, the amount of increase of CO-2 would constitute only about 3/8 of an inch in 100 yards.

Put in those terms, I can hardly get excited about global warming, especially since much of the increase in CO-2 is a natural phenomena traceable to the study referenced by the questioner.

So if this increase is so insignificant, why do people try to blow it up and present it in such alarming ways (Al Gore for example)?

The goal isn't "cleaner air" and no global warming proponent has said that if everything they want done is done that the planet would begin to cool down. And if it did begin to cool down, what if we couldn't stop it from cooling down. Then we have a global cooling catastrophe.

No, the goal is to shackle capitalism and bring it under total control of a central government. It is the only conclusion that makes sense to me.

Answer 3

Global warming is a complex issue.

Reading the popular media can lead a person to conclude that "global warming" is:
o- either a hoax to promote business opportunities, politicians agenda and scientists grant money.....
OR
o- a problem related to overpopulation, industrialization and fossil fuels whose solution options lie in solar power, wind power, geothermal power and nuclear fusion....

However, the correct answer may be altogether different:

NASA has released never-before-seen images that show the sun's magnetic field is much more turbulent and dynamic than previously known. The international spacecraft Hinode, formerly known as Solar B, took the images. Hinode was launched Sept. 23 to study the sun's magnetic field and its explosive energy. National Aeronautics and Space Administration scientists said the spacecraft's uninterrupted high-resolution observations of the sun are expected to have an impact on solar physics comparable to the Hubble Space Telescope's impact on astronomy. "For the first time, we are now able to make out tiny granules of hot gas that rise and fall in the sun's magnetized atmosphere," said Dick Fisher, director of NASA's Heliophyics Division. "These images will open a new era of study on some of the sun's processes that effect Earth, astronauts, orbiting satellites and the solar system." Hinode is a collaborative mission led by
the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency and includes the European Space Agency and Britain's Particle Physics Astronomy Research
Council. NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Ala., managed the development of the Hinode's scientific instrumentation provided by industry and federal agencies.

>>> as regards alternative energy methods, I favor development of the technology for nuclear fusion using lunar Helium 3

Answer 4

I think your politics has got in the way of you thinking clearly--don't worry it happens to anyone who cares at one time or another. Whether humans are to blame or not, we still have to live here, and have to keep the planet liveable. Whether it is industrial pollution, the sun, asteroids crashing into earth, or aliens invading--if something is going to change the planet so radically that most people are going to die of it, we need to do what we can to fix it. Saying that it is 'not our fault' doesn't make it 'not our problem'.

You have found an article the shows that variations in sun activity cause some climate change. What you are missing is that the cause of the change is only important in trying to find a solution. Even if you proved (which this article does not) that global warming is not affected by CO2 emmissions, it is still a problem for us to deal with! Finding other factors that influence climate change is important to the solution, because there may be more to the problem than our industry. We still have to solve the problem though!

Answer 5

Very interesting. I believe most of global warming is natural do to the earths rotation and tilt on it's axis and the variations in the sun.

But I also believe that the world is way behind in getting the pollution issue under control. If the global warming scare can get us off fossil fuels and into alternate fuel sources that would be a huge step forward.

Answer 6

This is just another grasp at keeping the ridiculously wasteful lifestyle some have since they failed in convincing everyone that global warming is a myth. Get an education so you can learn the difference between true research and some morons need for fifteen minutes of fame.

Answer 7

History shows warming and cooling periods,long before the industrial age.
The SUN has more to do with climate than man ever can.
Take the period 1939-1945, WW2, the world was on fire with war,burning cities,ships, planes,tanks,forests and industry pouring out materials.
Tons of Carbon per second,far more than now and no EPA regulations.
And it was COLD.
Winters were really harsh.
With all the burning crap,shouldn't have been warmer?

Answer 8

That is a great link. But here is a link that provides information and hundreds of links about the whole topic of global warming and how it is such a sham. The link can be found at

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Files.View&FileStore_id=56dd129d-e40a-4bad-abd9-68c808e8809e

This link gives you detailed links and logs for both sides of the arguments and shows how the media, the scientist, and environmentalist are dismissing anyone who is skeptical about their claim.

Answer 9

I have written about this several times on Yahoo Answers. There is really little doubt that the average global temperature has increased. What is in doubt is if humans are causing this temperature change, or if it is natural; and whether carbon dioxide, the sun, or something else is causing it.

There is strong evidence that the two curves of temperature and carbon dioxide levels are related. However, which predicates which and the cause and effect have not been determined. Initially, the cause and effect was though to be that carbon dioxide influences temperature. Meaning, as carbon dioxide levels increase the global temperature increased. However, it could be the other way around, increasing temperatures could be causing the increased levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. The timing of the two curves are close and new evidence may suggest that increase temperature is the actual cause, and that as the temperature increases more carbon dioxide stays in the atmosphere.

One thing is certain, the sun is a G class star that burns brighter and hotter as it ages, and the sun also experiences periods of high and low solar activity. During high periods, the earth receives an increased amount of solar radiation (heat and light). Current solar research appears to show the sun has reach the zenith of a high solar actively period, and this actively will soon start to decrease. If this is the case that would mean the amount of heat and light the earth receives will start to decrease, abrogating most, if not all, of the one degree temperature increase the earth has experienced.

One thing that really bothers me is the amount of misinformation bandied by leftist-politicians, Hollywood actors, and many people on yahoo answers about the global temperature and atmospheric carbon dioxide levels. Many of them claim that we are experiencing the highest levels of carbon dioxide in the history of the earth, and that the average global temperature is currently the highest ever. These statements are simply not true.

The fact of the matter is that the atmospheric carbon dioxide levels and average global temperature are the lowest they have been in the past 600 million years of geologic history. Today, carbon dioxide levels are 380 parts per million, or 0.038% of the atmosphere; and the average global temperature is 54 degrees Fahrenheit. The only other geologic period that has carbon dioxide levels and temperature similar to today is the Middle Carboniferous period. During every other period of geologic history atmospheric carbon dioxide level and temperature were much higher than today. For example, 200 million years ago during the Jurassic Period CO2 levels where about 1800 parts per million, 4.7 times higher than today. And 550 million years ago during the Cambrian Period the atmospheric carbon dioxide level was nearly 7000 parts per million, roughly 18 times higher than today.

The funny thing is that for the past 600 million years only the Carboniferous and Ordovician Periods had average global temperatures as low as today, and the Late Ordovician Period was actually an ice ago; however, the atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations during that period were 4400 parts per million, nearly 12 times higher than they are today!

I wish the global warming proponents could rectify that to me. Does this mean high levels of atmospheric CO2 cause an ice age and global warming? Huh, I will have to think about that.

The other thing to remember is that at 380 parts per million, the atmosphere is actually carbon starved, which is detrimental to plant life. Planets flourish and do best with CO2 levels at 1000 parts per million, nearly three times higher than what is currently in the atmosphere. Most commercial plant farms actually pump extra CO2 into their greenhouses to increase CO2 to that level. Plants keep in such an environment produced four times as many flowers, fruits, and vegetables as plants kept at "normal" CO2 levels.

Environmentalist should focuse their efforts on reducing pollution and enforcing the Clean Air and Clean Water Act, something that benefits us all, instead of wasting precious resources fighting the fictitious carbon dioxide threat.

Answer 10

I don't think anyone disputes that other factors affect the environment.

However, the ancients were not adding global pollution to the mix.

That does change the equation.