COMMENTS:
It would seem logical to me that the Sun would be a major factor on the Earth's environment.
And I don't see how signing the Kyoto Treaty is going to make sun spots and such magically disappear. But Russia signed it anyway because it was bribed that it would receive support for WTO membership if it did.
In any case, I believe that pollution of all kinds should be reduced REGARDLESS of global warming.
Yes, but the idiots who accepted the predominant view of AGW will fight this tooth and nail.
I should add however, some believe solar brightening has coincided with global dimming.
There are a large number of factors.
The ocean water conveyor belt, sun cycles, greenhouse gas emissions, volcanic activity, and large livestock populations (yes, that's right, because they emit astronomical amounts of methane which no other organisms do on such a scale), and there are signs of a possible reversal in the magnetic poles (over due by several hundred years) and a shift in the Earth's rotational axis.
They just happen to be coinciding at a time when a MAJOR ice age is due.
^What texsue57 said.
And agreeing that there are multiple causes for global temperatures should not be considered a carte blanche for polluting the atmosphere, without limits.
Nonsense, how could the sun, which is just tiny yellow disc that is devoured by the moon every night, possibly have any affect on something like the temperature of the earth?
Rising temperatures are as sign that the earth goddess is angry with us, and we must sacrifice modern civilization on an altar to appease her.
"Careful studies over the last 20 years"....
blame anything and everything except the most obvious culprit. Have you ever heard of Occam's Razor?
Having studied (and taught) astronomy for most of my life, with some of the most prominent astronomers of our time, I can categorically say that this theory is utter poppycock.
I am not even going to drone on with an argument, since anybody can do their own research using google. One additional research you might be interested in is the cancelling of one space mission that would have PROVED the effects of greenhouse gas on our planet.
do research on Dr. James E. Hansen, global precipitation mission, and Glory mission.
by LCD on Tue Apr 25, 06 10:09am
[+]
LCD- so you doubt the idea that the Sun has a profound affect on the Earth's atmosphere? And you doubt that changes in the Sun's nature would cause changes on the nature of earth?
And you doubt that solar flare activity has a great effect on the entire solar system?
I would like to hear your reasoning for rejecting the scientific theory that solar activity causes changes in the Earth's atmosphere.
Going by Occam's Razor would lead us to believe it is the sun.
As cranky so rightly assessed, this is a smokescreen. Yes, solar variability has had [italicize:some] impact. But small, compared to man-made sources.
The IPCC has addressed this in it's paper entitled [quote:Climate Change 2001, The Scientific Basis, pp. 380-82, Table 6.6.).
True, the sun's intensity does vary. In the late 1970s, sophisticated technology was developed that directly measures the sun's intensity.
Measurements from these instruments show that in the past 20 years, the sun's variations have been very small. Indirect measures of changes in sun's intensity since the beginning of the industrial revolution in 1750 show that variations in the sun's intensity do not account for all the warming that occurred in the 20th century and that the majority of the warming was caused by an increase in human- made greenhouse gas emissions.
And LCD is right ... this kind of information is readily available for anyone truly interested in the Truth ... as opposed to merely looking for license to pollute.
Cathexis- "Careful studies over the last 20 years show that its overall brightness and energy output increases slightly as sunspot activity rises to the peak of its 11-year cycle.
And individual cycles can be more or less active.
The sun is currently at its most active for 300 years.
The researchers point out that much of the half-a-degree rise in global temperature over the last 120 years occurred before 1940 - earlier than the biggest rise in greenhouse gas emissions.
Using ancient tree rings, they show that 17 out of 19 warm spells in the last 10,000 years coincided with peaks in solar activity."
- Will you ignore these scientists all together? Never mind, that is what they did to Galileo when he challenged popular belief.
You do know that sun spot activity and solar flares are very significant? VERY significant.
Cathexis
Would you be surprised if I told you the IPCC does NOT investigate the veracity of scientific papers? It only summarizes the major conclusions.
ANY excuse so we won't be forced to curb emissions.
ANY excuse to save the USA economy from collapse.
aplmac- I'm not American.
AND I would like to see emissions reduced regardless of global warming.
Voted : Yes, that could very well be possible
The question isn't whether global warming exists and/or whether it effects the Earth's weather/climate.
The real question should be: If global warming is occurring... are humans causing it?
The answer to that question is simple. There simply isn't enough information available to determine whether humans are causing global warming.
Accurate weather history only goes back approximately 200 years. The Earth is millions of years old. The Earth has gone through ice ages and subsequently warmed, and there were no humans causing the global warming then. The data isn't there.
|
