Why do we not see at all of the effects of Sunspots, normal earth cycles, and the 800-1300AD warming effect?

Question

The Earth is not alone in warming up in this sunspot cycle, but nobody seems concerned about Mars warming. Could Mars be warming for the same reasons as earth, or is it pollution from the Rovers?

I noted an alarm about the Great Barrier Reef, but nobody said how it survived the 1000AD (+/-) warming cycle, which happened w/o CO2 "pollution".

Nobody has looked and spoken to how man created the "Little Ice Age" in the 1700's, so we could do likewise.

Nobody mentions the normal long-term glaciation cycles regarding arctic ocean melting anymore...the ones that allowed the immigration from Siberia to North America some 11,000 years ago..

We all seem to be avoiding learning from the past...right? Why? Who profits from NOT checking history and science, and applying the lessons from the farther past?

Answer 1

Many of the troubles you have have been dealt with by the Met Office's research

See
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/corporate/pressoffice/myths/index.html

Then go search out other papers.

Answer 2

Trevor, if I may interject a little note. With regards to Pluto's warming. It SHOULD be noted that Pluto has the MOST eccentric orbit of all, and for the last 10 years or so it was actually INSIDE the orbit of Neptune and only in the last year or so it's orbit took it outside of that orbit. The warming would have been a NORMAL occurence due to Pluto's being closer to the sun and having a little bit of "extra" solar radiation due to that closeness (which should occur EVERY time that Pluto is in that particular spot of it's orbit).
Just thought I should mention that before someone jumped on that as being just another example of global warming and comparing it to Earth's warming trend.

Raji

Answer 3

Your knowledge of scientific principles and history is sorrowfully lacking. We can find basic data regarding past climate temperatures but there are no records of WHY. Until you can determine the cause of past events don't argue that causes are the same today. Just because the symptoms are similar does not mean it's the same disease.

We know human induced Global Warming due to CO2 production is indisputable fact since 1999 (long before that, but that was when the UN announced it to the world). Anyone who still argues eight years later that it doesn't exist is lying to themselves.

Answer 4

The scientists do check this stuff, extensively. See the links below for the details.

All the planets are not warming, so it's not the Sun. The NASA researcher's who measure Mars temperature say it's likely due to giant dust storms, which have been observed.

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/ames/research/2007/marswarming.html

Here's what scientists say about the sun and global warming:

http://solar-center.stanford.edu/sun-on-earth/FAQ2.html

The 1000 AD cycle was not as severe as what's happening now. Data, with scientific references.

http://www.globalwarmingart.com/wiki/Image:2000_Year_Temperature_Comparison_png

Much more science like that here (it's very long):

http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/wg1-report.html

They're _very_ thorough about this.

Answer 5

Why should we be concerned about an inhabitable planet when we're living on this one?

There is no record keeping of temperatures that go further back than the mid 1800's. So, I don't know what you base the fluctuation in temps concerning the Barrier Reef.

Man did not create the Ice Age. There is NO evidence of man having even existed on the planet at the time. No human bones have been found dating back to that period.

Siberians migrating to N. America 11,000 years ago? All that inhabited Amercia a little more than 200 years ago was Indians! Siberia's peat bogs were only estimated to be forming 11,000 years ago.

What planet are you from???

Answer 6

Grizz we know the MWP happened, was warmer than today, as much as the UN doesn't want to admit that, and we know CO2 levels were lower - that means the proximate cause wasn't us and wasn't CO2.

That means you can't just infer that it's CO2 this time around just because CO2 is up by 1/11,000th of the atmosphere over 200 years.

'Kay?

Answer 7

I think the point of the Global Warming crowd is that you can't learn from the past because the past doesn't involve humans. See this has nothing to do with right or wrong, this is all to do about power. The environmentalist wackos want more power in your life to control you. They want their "clean water, air, soil" they want to get rid of SUV's. They care nothing for global warming, they want power. No one listens to them, so this is their biggest soap box. They will use it, facts be damned. You asked them for proof and they get upset, you shouldn't need proof the seriousness of what we are saying is enough. It is bogus, but *gasp* what if it is true. Fear. That is all, creating fear to get power.

Answer 8

I'd hazard a guess that you've been talking to global warming skeptics or have been reading material they've produced. Unfortunately, as is so often the case, you've been fed utter nonsense by people who are far more concerned with their individual aggendas than the facts.

Quite simple, all the points you mentioned and a great many more are taken into account. They are studied in minute detail. Allow me to give you some truths...

SUNSPOTS
Sunspots occur on an eleven year cycle, if global warming and cooling also occured in eleven year cycles then it would be fair to say there was a correlation between the two - there isn't.

SOLAR VARIATION
I suspect that it's not sunspot cycles you're referring to but Solar Variation - this is the sum variation of all solar cycles and other solar activity. There are many factors interacting with each other causing a constant, irregular variation in heat energy received from the sun. The difference between maximum and minumin variation (called Insolation Maxima and Insolation Minima) is very small - it's a deviation from the mean of less than one thousandth. Over short periods of time this is insufficient to have any noticeable impact on our climate. The cumulative affect over long periods of time can cause substantial climatic variations as seen in the coming and going of ice ages, a process which cycles at approximately 100 million year intervals.

MILANKOVITCH CYCLES
Normal earth cycles are also taken into account but again, these can only affect our climate over long periods of time. The shortest Earthly cycle is a precessional (gyroscopic) one that lasts 19,000 years.

MEDIEVAL WARM PERIOD
The '800-1300AD warming effect' is a period referred to as the Medieval Warm Period (MWP). It was the culmination of 1000 years of natural warming which saw temperatures rise by 0.7 degrees C. Contrary to what many skeptics will tell you, the temperatures were not warmer than they are now.

A temperature change of 0.7C in a 1000 year period is within expected natural tolerances, it equates to a rise of 0.0007C per year, temperatures over the last few decades have been rising 0.0156C per year - 22 times as fast and far beyond any natural tolerance.

WARMING ON MARS
Once again, the skeptics have been feeding you misinformation regarding Mars. The only climatic information relating to Mars obviously comes from NASA, they have produced reports stating that some parts of Mars are showing signs of warming. Skeptics interpret this as meaning that all of Mars is warming, that it's because of solar variation and that this is why Erath is warming. They conveniently forget to mention the rest of the reports which state other parts of Mars are cooling, it has nothing to do with increased solar output and is not related to warming on Earth.

Only one other body in our solar system is experiencing global warming and that's Pluto and this is because atmopsheric pressure has tripled in a little over a decade.

There's 172 planets and moons in our solar system, the vast majority are showing no signs of warming.

You asked why Mars is warming. It's inpossible to say as there isn't enough conclusive data, we can't even say for certain that parts of Mars are warming. Any warming that there occurs is likely to be the result of global duststorms that sweep across the entire planet for several days at a time. Such an even here on Earth, were it possible, would also cause significant changes to our climate.

GREAT BARRIER REEF
The Great Barrier Reef is a coral reef and like all corals it is affected by the alkalinity and temperature of the water. Acidification caused by increased carbon compounds destroys coral, during the MWP there was little variation in carbon levels and as seas and oceans are such massive bodies of water the speed at which they warm up and cool down is minute. In short, there was no reason for any significant change in coral ecosystems. Today is very different, CO2 levels have risen far beyond that which has existed at any time since we inhabited the planet, the alkalinity of the oceans is dropping and the difference between ocean and ambient temperature is greater than ever.

LITTLE ICE AGE
As with the MWP this was an event that occured over hundreds of years and saw annual temperature changes far smaller than we're presently seeing. The LIA wasn't a global event and was confined primarily to Europe. The period of the LIA coincided with several centuries of near zero sunspot activity (called the Maunder Minimum), increased volcanic activity (volcanoes cool the planet) and the Black Death. This killed between 30 and 70% of the European population and obviously led to a substantial reduction in emissions of greenhouse gases - primarily through agricultural decline.

Any one of these events by itself would have had little impact but a sustained combination of all three would have, and did have, a measurable effect.

GLACIATION CYCLES
The most recent glacial retreat began 18,000 years ago and for the next 7,500 years glaciers retreated rapidly, for the following 11,500 years they retreated more slowly. 11,000 years ago there was considerably more glaciation than there is now and it would have been possible to cross from Siberia to North America with ease. Until a few decades ago this was possible when the sea ice froze each winter - it's rarely possible nowadays.

LEARNING FROM THE PAST
I've gone through each and every point you mentioned and have, I hope, demonstrated that we do indeed know what has happened in the past. Once again we return to the skeptics and once again we find these are all aspects that they conveniently seem to overlook or deliberately distort. The real science takes all factors into account, not just the ones that are convenient.