Do you think global warming is caused by the sun?

Question

Or if you say it's due to "natural cycles", do you mean by variations in the sun? I assume you must, because it's not due to volcanoes. If so, what do you say to the following?

Dr. Mike Lockwood: "What we've done is a very simple straightforward analysis. We haven't used models because a lot of the climate sceptics get very upset by models; they're very difficult to understand and sometimes they can behave in a slightly strange way. So we deliberately just kept it to a simple analysis of data which showed that since 1985 the Sun actually has been getting very, very slightly less bright. A very small effect, but it's in the wrong direction to help global warming, so that was one thing. And then the cosmic rays, having reached an all-time minimum, they've been recovering ever since."

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/scienceshow/stories/2007/1974497.htm

As solar activity has decreased while global warming has accelerated, clearly the sun is not the culprit. Does this change your view?

Most people in the environment section know this information already. As global warming has also become a political issue and people in this section are very poorly informed about the science, I thought it was appropriate to ask here.

The answers so far show you why I say that - the usual bull about Mars and Jupiter, denial for the sake of denial, just simple ignorance. That's why I ask the question here.

Answer 1

News flash, your fearless leader now acknowledges global warming. So ask him since that's all you will believe anyway.

Answer 2

Global warming is caused by us. It is caused by us driving cars. The fumes that come out of it goes into the air and kills the trees and plants and stuff liket that. That is also why more people are getting sick. If more people rode thier bike to work or walked, the earth wouls less suffer from this. Hop i helped.

Answer 3

a half of a degree warmer in the last 100 yrs....run for the hills.

That means 400 yrs from now instead of it being 116 in the DESERT its 118. I see the difference. We must act now lol. By then Iran will be the Government of the NWO.

Answer 4

Booman's response certainly echoes the information I've received from informed sources--i.e., those outside the liberals in the mainstream media and scientific community. My advice is, don't worry about what you can't control. there is nothing that humans can possibly do to destroy the earth; if that were so, it would have become uninhabitable hundreds of years ago, if not thousands.

Answer 5

no, not at all...seeing as how carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere rise AFTER increases in solar activity, it makes perfect sense.

and ask Dr. lockwood why the mars ice caps are melting...as far as i know, no humans are driving suv's there...

anthropogenic global warming is a scam...do some more homework and stop being a chump!

Answer 6

I have said before, and I maintain that Al Gore's mouth is the sole cause of global warming.

Answer 7

This scientist probably didn't use models because he kept getting results that didn't match the conclusions he had already reached.

We thank him for playing and we have some lovely parting gifts for him, though.

Answer 8

Possibly, since it's also occurring on Mars, Jupiter and Pluto.

PS Isn't there a substantive answer to my point?

Answer 9

Here is a quick list of how the train of thought on our invironment has changed in the media in the past.
Since 1895, the media has alternated between global cooling and warming scares during four separate and sometimes overlapping time periods. From 1895 until the 1930's the media peddled a coming ice age. From the late 1920's until the 1960's they warned of global warming. From the 1950's until the 1970's they warned us again of a coming ice age. This makes modern global warming the fourth estate's fourth attempt to promote opposing climate change fears during the last 100 years.

The National Academy of Sciences report reaffirmed the existence of the Medieval Warm Period from about 900 AD to 1300 AD and the Little Ice Age from about 1500 to 1850. Both of these periods occurred long before the invention of the SUV or human industrial activity could have possibly impacted the Earth's climate. In fact, scientists believe the Earth was warmer than today during the Medieval Warm Period, when the Vikings grew crops in Greenland.

What the climate alarmists and their advocates in the media have continued to ignore is the fact that the Little Ice Age, which resulted in harsh winters which froze New York Harbor and caused untold deaths, ended about 1850. So trying to prove man-made global warming by comparing the well-known fact that today's temperatures are warmer than during the Little Ice Age is akin to comparing summer to winter to show a catastrophic temperature trend.

Something that the media almost never addresses are the holes in the theory that C02 has been the driving force in global warming. Alarmists fail to adequately explain why temperatures began warming at the end of the Little Ice Age in about 1850, long before man-made CO2 emissions could have impacted the climate. Then about 1940, just as man-made CO2 emissions rose sharply, the temperatures began a decline that lasted until the 1970's, prompting the media and many scientists to fear a coming ice age.

A letter sent to the Canadian Prime Minister on April 6, 2006 by 60 prominent scientists who question the basis for climate alarmism, clearly explains the current state of scientific knowledge on global warming. The 60 scientists wrote: "If, back in the mid-1990s, we knew what we know today about climate, Kyoto would almost certainly not exist, because we would have concluded it was not necessary." The letter also noted: "‘Climate change is real' is a meaningless phrase used repeatedly by activists to convince the public that a climate catastrophe is looming and humanity is the cause. Neither of these fears is justified. Global climate changes occur all the time due to natural causes and the human impact still remains impossible to distinguish from this natural ‘noise."

In 2006, the director of the International Arctic Research Center in Fairbanks Alaska, testified to Congress that highly publicized climate models showing a disappearing Arctic were nothing more than "science fiction."

"Geologists Think the World May be Frozen Up Again." That sentence appeared over 100 years ago in the February 24, 1895 edition of the New York Times.

A front page article in the October 7, 1912 New York Times, just a few months after the Titanic struck an iceberg and sank, declared that a prominent professor "Warns Us of an Encroaching Ice Age." The very same day in 1912, the Los Angeles Times ran an article warning that the "Human race will have to fight for its existence against cold." An August 10, 1923 Washington Post article declared: "Ice Age Coming Here."

By the 1930's, the media took a break from reporting on the coming ice age and instead switched gears to promoting global warming: "America in Longest Warm Spell Since 1776; Temperature Line Records a 25-year Rise" stated an article in the New York Times on March 27, 1933.

The media of yesteryear was also not above injecting large amounts of fear and alarmism into their climate articles. An August 9, 1923 front page article in the Chicago Tribune declared: "Scientist Says Arctic Ice Will Wipe Out Canada." The article quoted a Yale University professor who predicted that large parts of Europe and Asia would be "wiped out" and Switzerland would be "entirely obliterated."

A December 29, 1974 New York Times article on global cooling reported that climatologists believed "the facts of the present climate change are such that the most optimistic experts would assign near certainty to major crop failure in a decade." The article also warned that unless government officials reacted to the coming catastrophe, "mass deaths by starvation and probably in anarchy and violence" would result. In 1975, the New York Times reported that "A major cooling [was] widely considered to be inevitable."

On February 19, 2006, CBS News's "60 Minutes" produced a segment on the North Pole. The segment was a completely one-sided report, alleging rapid and unprecedented melting at the polar cap. It even featured correspondent Scott Pelley claiming that the ice in Greenland was melting so fast, that he barely got off an ice-berg before it collapsed into the water. "60 Minutes" failed to inform its viewers that a 2005 study by a scientist named Ola Johannessen and his colleagues showing that the interior of Greenland is gaining ice and mass and that according to scientists, the Arctic was warmer in the 1930's than today.

According to data released on July 14, 2006 from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the January through June Alaska statewide average temperature was "0.55F (0.30C) cooler than the 1971-2000 average."

In August 2006, Khabibullo Abdusamatov, a scientist who heads the space research sector for the Russian Academy of Sciences, predicted long-term global cooling may be on the horizon due to a projected decrease in the sun's output.

Answer 10

No, it emanates from the hot air in Washington.