Is global warming caused by the sun?

Question

OK let's break this down for all of the psuedo-scientists.
What is responsible for most of the heat on the earth? If you said the sun, good for you.
Does the temperature on the sun vary? If you said yes, goog for you.
Are there solar flares that produce massive amounts of heat? If you said yes, good for you.
Is it possible and likely that a gradual increase in temperature of the sun could creat a gradual increase on earth? Once again good for you if you said yes.
Have scientists admitted that they do not fully understand solar flares and their effects? Once again....yes.

Should we send ALGORE to the sun to do his power point presentation and convince all of the residents of the sun that they are responsible for heating up the earth? Of course the answer is yes.

Answer 1

There is some very good argument for the sun as the cause of climate change and not an increased level of CO2. Here are some quotes to support your argument and a link with plenty of evidence:

“there is an excellent correlation between sunspot cycle and Earth’s climate”

“If CO2 is of such critical importance to climate change, why was there a large temperature rise prior to the early 1940s when 80 percent of the human produced carbon dioxide was produced after World War II? When CO2 levels finally began to increase dramatically in the post war years why was there a concomitant interval of about 30 years of cooling?

“There is no statistical correlation between the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere through the last 500 million years and the temperature record in the interval. In fact, one of the highest levels of carbon dioxide concentration occurred during a major ice age that occurred about 450 million years ago. Carbon dioxide concentrations at the time were about 15 times higher than at present.”

http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/Reference_Docs/The_Geologic_Record_and_Climate_Change.pdf

Answer 2

I think you should have phrased the question differently, it comes across as patronising and condescending and unfortunately it's backfired because it shows you don't really understand what you're talking about.

A) For all intents and purposes the sun is repsonsible for ALL the heat on Earth (99.997% of it).

B) The average temperature of the sun hardly varies at all, it's amount of solar irradiance that varies - two very different things.

C) Solar flares don't produce massive amounts of heat, they alter the distribution of it, the heat would have been generated anyway.

D) You forgot to mention that total solar irradiance has been falling slightly whilst at the same time temps on Earth have been rising faster than ever.

E) You didn't mention that we can measure with incredible accuracy the amount of heat being received from the sun.

F) You overlooked that the Sun was long since ruled out as the reason for current global warming.

G) You ovelooked the most important single aspect of global warming - the greenhouse gases and the role they play.

H) Your brought Al Gore into it.


The basic premise of what you're saying is correct but you're taking things out of context and skewing facts to suit, not a clever thing to do as it contributes nothing of consequence to the global warming debate and lessens any credibility you may have had. Be skeptical, question GW, put GW proponents on the spot but do it honestly and openly.

Answer 3

Has the solar hypothesis been thoroughly refuted? If you said yes, good for you.

1. Direct measurement of total solar irradiance (TSI) by satellite has been going on since 1978. These measurements show the 11-year cycle, but no long-term upward trend during that time. Here's the data.
http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/stp/SOLAR/solarda3.html

2. Going farther back than 1978, solar irradiance can be determined a number of ways using proxy data, such as the production of cosmogenic isotopes like 14C and 10Be. These data show that TSI peaked about 1957-60 and has shown no significant increase since that time. Here are the peer-reviewed studies:
http://www.pubs.royalsoc.ac.uk/media/proceedings_a/rspa20071880.pdf
http://www.mpa-garching.mpg.de/mpa/publications/preprints/pp2006/MPA2001.pdf

3. If the sun is getting hotter, then the biggest heating should occur during the daytime when the extra energy comes in. On the other hand, if the greenhouse effect is increasing, then the biggest effect should occur at night, when the extra energy does NOT go out. In fact, the biggest temperature changes have been nighttime lows, meaning that the daily temperature range is decreasing as the earth warms. This is a "smoking gun" for the greenhouse effect. Here are the peer-reviewed papers:
http://www.bom.gov.au/bmrc/clfor/cfstaff/jma/2004GL019998.pdf
http://ams.allenpress.com/perlserv/?request=get-abstract&doi=10.1175%2F1520-0450(1984)023%3C1489:DDTRIT%3E2.0.CO%3B2

4. If the sun is getting hotter, then more energy is coming in, and the entire atmosphere should be getting warmer. But if the greenhouse effect is increasing, then the energy coming in is the same, but it's being distributed differently: more heat is being trapped at the surface, meaning less heat escapes to the stratosphere. And in fact, the stratosphere has been cooling as the surface has been warming, for as far back as we have radiosonde balloon data (which is the 1950's). This is another "smoking gun" for the greenhouse effect. Here's the data:
http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/temp/sterin/sterin.html

Answer 4

I think solar panel expert knows how to deal with it because they have made the solar panel they have just made the same system of global warming and i so this on -- discovery channel y. 2057? Maybe they have the answer? It is very interesting.
It also shows elevator using very strong special cable. Like just my theory by special cable it happened that my system is like fishing using air balloon as a base up in the sky then just lower the cable and there you go you get a big fish? I will give you a theory hint do you ever so the system of ant that lives on soil? maybe one day we may live like the ants system ho knows? If there is a mineral stone that can take or eat heat of the sun light and yet it remain cold that will be something?

Answer 5

Are you old enough to be on this site? Because eventually you are going to get to a grade in school where you take geometry. Then you'll understand you are so far out in left field that Cecil Fielder couldn't hit a ball to you.

If you took the time to look at the GW Force Factor Charts you would know that such a small percentage of the Sun's output hits the Earth that flares and solar cycles have little or no effect. And if you are going to compare to other planets next ... they don't have atmospheres.

Get with the times kid, everything you're saying has already been discredited. Keep this up and your grades will be so low you won't make it into high school let alone out of it.

Answer 6

Global warming is from the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere holding the heat of the sun to the Earth. Basically global warming is just putting the Earth under a blanket.

Answer 7

There is much evidence that points to the sun as the reason the Earth is over 500 degrees Fahrenheit above absolute zero. There is also much evidence that solar variability is the major controlling force of our climate system, unless you believe Dana's BBC link. The sun's magnetic field and it's effect on the entire solar system are still not understood. The UV variability of solar energy is still not factored into earths energy budget, but instead of balancing research budgets to attempt to explain what is really going on, and what really could happen in the future, the majority of the global scientific community are pawns in a militant chess game for some type of socialists plot in a bid for global control.

The projections in the IPCC report for the remainder of this century assume that solar output will not fluctuate, a foolish and naive prediction that will leave the world ill prepared for a possible dangerous cooling episode in the middle of this century.

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/news/topstory/2003/0313irradiance.html

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2006/10may_longrange.htm

.
.

Answer 8

You forgot one.

Have scientists been closely monitoring the sun for the past thirty years, and thus know that no variations in solar output have occurred since at least 1978, and possibly 1940, ruling out the sun as a possible cause of twentieth century warming? If you answered yes, good for you.

Follow these links and read up on the sun's influence on the current climate change.

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/09/the-trouble-with-sunspots/

http://www.pmodwrc.ch/pmod.php?topic=tsi/composite/SolarConstant

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=180

Answer 9

No No and No

Global warming is due to CO2 emissions being Way out of the natural cycle. They make the atmosphere thicker so more of the suns radiation gets trapped in the atmosphere warming up the earth.

And the sun has sun spot phases and right now there aren't that many so the solar flares and radiation isn't as strong.

And NO Al Gore (may be boring) but he is right and the world needs to wake up before we all die!

Answer 10

haha you are so wrong.
you are wrong. the longwave radiation caused by the sun's irradiance when it contacts a solid object is what is causing global warming. The object's absolute temperature is relatively cold compared to the sun, and thus emits longer wave radiation, ergo the earth is cooler and emits the longwave radiation - the source of which is the sun's short wave.
CO2 absorbs long wave radiation, not short wave solar radiation, so we would have to have more CO2, CH4, CFC's etc in the atmosphere in order to cause a warming...oh and what's that, we do have warming and we do have higher levels of those green house gasses, what a coincidence!!
no, it's a fact we are warming the earth..
Your logic would be true if the earth's average insolation per unit area has increased, but it has not, so the sun is not emitting more radiation, insteas the atmosphere is trapping more.

Please get a clue