result #112013 - GLOBAL WARMING CAUSED BY THE SUN?

search this site: search the web:

Find out what Britney Spears was really doing while in rehab - she was on Bestandworst.com!

result #112013 - GLOBAL WARMING CAUSED BY THE SUN?

user ballots

Popular Ballots
Recent Popular
Recent Votes

Best
Worst
Yes or No
Choices
What If
Prediction
Advice
Would You
Crime
Recommend
Quiz

TV & Movie
Music & Radio
Political
Science
Sports
Relationship
Techonology
Culture
Philosophy
Religion
Ethics
History
Food & Health
Fashion & Beauty
Crime
FanBase

Discussion
Bug Report

GLOBAL WARMING CAUSED BY THE SUN?

[+] serious ballot by xxxxxxxx
created Tue Feb 06, 07

"Just when you were starting to believe that variations in the amount of energy coming from the sun weren’t responsible for much of the observed surface warming during the past 20 years, comes along a paper in Geophysical Research Letters from two researchers at Duke University, Nicola Scafetta and Bruce West, that concludes otherwise:

"We estimate that the sun contributed as much as 45–50% of the 1900–2000 global warming, and 25–35% of the 1980–2000 global warming. These results, while confirming that anthropogenic-added climate forcing might have progressively played a dominant role in climate change during the last century, also suggest that the solar impact on climate change during the same period is significantly stronger than what some theoretical models have predicted."

Scafetta and West arrive at their conclusions after applying a mathematical scheme that allows the cycles in solar variations to explain the cycles in temperature variations. They find this empirical method far superior to theoretical (i.e. climate models) methods because empirical methods take advantage of real behavior while theoretical methods are just that—theories—which very likely do not capture all of the real-world intricacies relating solar energy to climate processes.

The authors summarize:

"The sun played a dominant role in climate change in the early past, as several empirical studies would suggest, and is still playing a significant, even if not a predominant role, during the last decades. The impact of solar variation on climate seems significantly stronger than predicted by some energy balance models…The significant discrepancy between empirical and theoretical model estimates might arise because the secular TSI proxy reconstructions are disputed and/or because the empirical evidence deriving from the deconstruction of the surface temperature is deceptive for reasons unknown to us. Alternatively, the models might be inadequate because of the difficulty of modeling climate in general and a lack of knowledge of climate sensitivity to solar variations in particular. In fact, theoretical models usually acknowledge as solar forcing only the direct TSI forcing while empirical estimates would include all direct and indirect climate effects induced by solar variation. These solar effects might be embedded in several climate forcings because, for example, a TSI increase might indirectly induce a change in the chemistry of the atmosphere by increasing and modulating its greenhouse gas (H2O, CO2, CH4, etc.) concentration because of the warmer ocean, reduce the earth albedo by melting the glaciers and change the cloud cover patterns. In particular, the models might be inadequate: (a) in their parameterizations of climate feedbacks and atmosphere-ocean coupling; (b) in their neglect of indirect response by the stratosphere and of possible additional climate effects linked to solar magnetic field, UV radiation, solar flares and cosmic ray intensity modulations; (c) there might be other possible natural amplification mechanisms deriving from internal modes of climate variability which are not included in the models. All the above mechanisms would be automatically considered and indirectly included in the phenomenological approach presented herein."

The bigger the observed solar impact, the smaller the observed human impact. The smaller the human impact, the less sensitive the climate is to greenhouse gas emissions. The less sensitive the climate is to greenhouse gas emissions, the less the impact greenhouse changes (and greenhouse gas emissions restrictions) will have in the future."

(Source: World Climate Report)

Picture: Sun spot activity. Notice how there is a steady rise in sun spot activity from the start of the Century to around 1960? That is in line with the rise in temperatures of that time. Notice how there is a dip in sun spot activity between 1960 and 1980? This is in line with the levelling off of temperature rises and a lowering of temperatures that occured during this time- the time which happened to be that of the Global Cooling scare. Then notice how sun spot activity rises drastically yet again after the previous levelling off? That is in line with the rise in temperatures that occured during that time as well.

- Ballot Question: Why is the role of the activity of the Sun not more widely discussed in relation to the causationS (yes, that is not a plural by mistake) of Global Warming?

It is, it just doesn't account for most of the global warming in the best case	43%
Throughout history new theories have always been too easily dismissed	21%
Of course. We are experiencing a period of increased solar activity.	21%
I don't know, it is a mystery to me	13%
This theory isn't receiving too little discussion	0%

Ballot #112013: has 23 total votes.
invite people to vote on this ballot!

Comment:

content @ BESTANDWORST.COM

smile bank:

if you don't see an image, click here.

email this ballot link to friends

You can also reach this ballot at :
http://BestAndWorst.com/v/112013.htm

similiar ballots:
100838. True/false, questioning the extent to which global warming is caused by...
111269. How will global warming deniers react if Bush flip-flops on global warming?
82061. Global Warming..
76709. How big of a problem is global warming?
98998. Has there been too much alarmism over Global Warming?
100120. Is global warming real???
100816. What do you think about people who tell you "We Cause Global Warming!!"?
112019. Does anybody else here think that global warming is AWESOME?
112065. What are the REAL causes of global warming?
119251. The PositiveThings About Global Warming...

COMMENTS:
See also ballot #93065

by xxxxxxxx on Tue Feb 06, 07 8:40am [+]

i don't know. you tell us champ.

and next time edit your ballot down or i'l bitch slap you into next tuesday. _Beelzebubba_Dick

by Kev24 on Tue Feb 06, 07 8:41am [+]

Voted : Throughout history new theories have always been too easily dismissed
Most likely dogmatic attachments to already existing theories concerning the issue of climate change.

by xxxxxxxx on Tue Feb 06, 07 8:41am [+]

Voted : This theory isn't receiving too little discussion
A relationship between sunspot activity and climate change is not a new theory, and I have heard it discussed. However, since there is little to be done about sunspots, doesn't it make more sense to mitigate potentially devastating global warming factors that we can control?

Another question that might be asked is: why hasn't this theory been more widely discussed among global warming deniers?

by cranky on Tue Feb 06, 07 8:51am [+]

Voted : I don't know, it is a mystery to me
Now that you mention it, the Sun is pretty hot. It might warm up the earth. It warms up my pool, maybe it would warm the sea. I think you might be on to something here. 043

by passiveson on Tue Feb 06, 07 9:02am [+]

Voted : It is, it just doesn't account for most of the global warming in the best case
Its not new cranky. It doesn't account for most of global warming even by those who propose it.

Socrates, this is BS and you know it. You only posted this response to a comment I made on another ballot. Sun activity is not significant enough to cause global warming. Even those scientists who did the study say this only accounts for 30% of the global warming (more likely 10%). It doesn't account for the other 70%. Try actually reading their research instead of cutting and pasting. Get your head out of the sand. I used to think you were intelligent. Now I am not too sure. Instead of distorting reality, selectively quoting, and quoting out of context (which is what you are doing), perhaps you should examine the issue more closely.

by FiddleFaddleOnLSD on Tue Feb 06, 07 9:06am [+]

FiddleFaddleOnLSD -

The Sun is very fluctuant and its temperature varies depending on numerous cycles of sun spot activity. So it is just a coincidence that the rise in Sun spot activity, its decline, and tehn its rise again is in line with temperature rises and falls over the past century? Can you not see the correlation?

- "Sun activity is not significant enough to cause global warming." - Except that the sun is currently at its most active for hundreds of years.

- And where did you get your statistic for a mere 10%? I would like to know your source on that one.

" Even those scientists who did the study say this only accounts for 30% of the global warming (more likely 10%). It doesn't account for the other 70%."

- Ah, good. Now we are talking about proportionality in regards to causation. I believe that would be useful. How much of a percentage is calculated to be attributed as the proportion that causes Global Warming? Interesting that whenever it comes to discussion over the Sun, there is talk of percentage of causation, yet when it comes to pollution, I have not heard any discussion about its percentage- it always seems to be discussed as if it it causes it 100%, which is really quite zealous, isn't it? I have never said that the Sun causes all global warming anyway, which is why in the ballot question I referred to 'causations'- which is a plural.

by xxxxxxxx on Tue Feb 06, 07 9:21am [+]

"Instead of distorting reality, selectively quoting, and quoting out of context (which is what you are doing), perhaps you should examine the issue more closely"

- Not quite. I pasted the entire article, I didn't selectively quote. I provided a picture graphing the statistics of Sun spot activity- which is quite objective. And in my link to my previous ballot, my source is the BBC, which although usually biased to the left, seems pretty level in that article.

by xxxxxxxx on Tue Feb 06, 07 9:23am [+]

Voted : Of course. We are experiencing a period of increased solar activity.
The whole solar system is experiencing a warming trend.

I blame LCD for buying an RV. 043

by _Beelzebubba on Tue Feb 06, 07 9:29am [+]

cranky- "doesn't it make more sense to mitigate potentially devastating global warming factors that we can control?"

- It would be helpful to know to what extent and proportion each factor exactly plays in causing change in the Earth's climate.

by xxxxxxxx on Tue Feb 06, 07 10:19am [+]

And at what proportion would you suggest we do nothing about manmade aspects of global warming?

by cranky on Tue Feb 06, 07 10:37am [+]

cranky- Actually, regardless of global warming, carbon emissions should be greatly reduced. There are many other reasons to do so.

I would suggest a transition to nuclear energy would be one step commendable to take.

by xxxxxxxx on Tue Feb 06, 07 10:44am [+]

I agree with cranky. It makes sense to find out what all the facts are, but focus on the 70% to 90% we have control over.

by skylab on Tue Feb 06, 07 4:39pm [+]

Voted : Throughout history new theories have always been too easily dismissed
But how could the sun in any way be responsible for the temperature of the planet? Ohhh . .. . I see.

by herzog on Tue Feb 06, 07 5:03pm [+]

skylab- Where did you get the statistic of 70-90% ? I would like to see a source on that one.

by xxxxxxxx on Tue Feb 06, 07 9:17pm [+]

Tin foil hat wearers herzog and socrates.

by TinCan on Wed Jan 02, 08 9:19pm [+]

About Us | Join Us | Privacy Policy |