Rumor has it the sun can create heat!

[Labrocca]

http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/financialpost/story.html?id=67ac2d90-ec56-4460-a831-75aacc20670d

The heat's in the sun
LAWRENCE SOLOMON, Financial Post
Published: Friday, March 09, 2007

We live in extraordinarily hot times, says Sami Solanki of the Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research in Germany. In 2004, he led a team of scientists that, for the first time, quantitatively reconstructed the sun's activity since the last Ice Age, some 11,400 years ago. Earth hasn't been this hot in 8,000 years and, he predicts, the hot spell will carry on for a few more decades before the sun turns down the heat.

The 19th and 20th centuries are especially noteworthy. "The sun is in a changed state. It is brighter than it was a few hundred years ago and this brightening started relatively recently -- in the last 100 to 150 years," he says. "The sun has been at its strongest over the past 60 years and may now be affecting global temperatures."

Dr. Solanki gives cold comfort to those who claim that global warming took off with the Industrial Revolution, and that the warming we've seen over the last century is mostly man-made. To demonstrate how unlikely this is, Dr. Solanki shows an almost perfect correlation between solar cycles and air temperatures over the land masses in the Northern hemisphere, going back to the mid 19th century.

For example, when the length of solar cycle increased dramatically, as it did in from 1910 to 1940, so did the temperature on Earth; when it decreased, as it did from the 1940s to the 1960s, so too did Earth temperatures. Dr. Solanki's startling correlation marked a pivotal point in the climate change debate: Its publication, more than any other single event, caused researchers around the world to examine the role that the sun plays in heating and cooling our planet.

Not that Dr. Solanki discredits the role of man-made greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide. These have probably played a large role in Earth's climate, he believes, but only since 1980 or so, when the sun's almost perfect correlation with Earth temperatures ended. He also believes that evidence that greenhouse gases have played a larger role in climate change may some day turn up, because his near-perfect correlation does not constitute proof. To date, however, he hasn't seen anything compelling that undermines his own findings.

The answer to most of the global warming we have seen over the past century, Dr. Solanki believes, will likely be somehow associated with the sun, and involve one or more of its parameters. It could be the sun's total irradiance, he states, citing work by others that he respects, or it could be the solar spectral irradiance, in particular with regard to ultraviolet radiation in the stratosphere. Or it could be the sun's open magnetic flux, which modulates the galactic cosmic-ray flux. Or it could be other factors -- many potential solar drivers of our climate exist.

Dr. Solanki is especially taken with the work of the Danish National Space Agency, which demonstrated the dramatic effect that cosmic rays can have on cloud formation, and thus temperatures -- "the mechanism is just too beautiful to ignore," he offers.

Among the factors that he believes hold great promise, and that cry out for investigation, are the sun's irradiance and its magnetic field, which underlie all solar activity. "Unfortunately, regular and detailed measurements of the sun's surface magnetic field are only available for a few decades, not long enough for comparison with climate," he says on his Web site. "Records of the solar irradiance are available for an even shorter length of time" -- accurate measurements began in 1978 using instrumentation aboard spacecraft. With knowledge of these fundamental determinants of Earth's climate still in their infancy, we cannot act with confidence on climate change.


Dr. Solanki's recommendation: more research, and lots of it. To uncover a possible connection between solar irradiance and magnetic-field variations and climate, he thinks it necessary to extend the irradiance record to earlier times with the help of models. To understand the mechanisms responsible for variations in solar brightness, it is necessary to study solar variability on time scales of days to centuries.

Until the research is in, he believes, the story of what drives climate change remains unknown.


Yeah who would have thought that giant ball of fire in the sky might be heating up our planet? Jeeez...and here I thought it was cuz we drove cars too much that made the earth too hot.

[Stoner]

Rumor has it the sun can create heat!


No way, dude. It must be SUVs. Has to be. Couldn't possibly be anything else.

[Elrathin]

It must be the Retarded Noecons Invisible Man doing it LOL.

[Labrocca]

It must be the Retarded Noecons Invisible Man doing it LOL.




Spoken like a true conspiracy theorist that listens to the muck of Air America and it's liberal ideas that everything corporate must be evil and the root cause of anything bad in the world. I am glad you refute my post with nonsense because that just means you couldn't come up with an honest rebuttle to the post.

[Stoner]

Spoken like a true conspiracy theorist that listens to the muck of Air America

Dude, it's El. Did you expect anything else? Did you actually think we were going to get something intelligent from him?

Just more third-grade behavior. Surprised he didn't use the mirror tecnique. Well, there's still time in this thread for that.

[Elrathin]

I am glad you refute my post with nonsense because that just means you couldn't come up with an honest rebuttle to the post.


That's funny considering you and Stoner have dodged PMs articles cause you can't refute them. Try again Slick. Until you and Stoner actually refute something for a change with proof instead of rhetoric come back and talk.

As for nonsense behavior, you don't seem to mind it when it is a Retarded Neocon doing it. Biased much? Yep, you sure are and everyone sees it here. But I don't mind the brown ring on your neck, it looks good on you.

[Elrathin]

Dude, it's El. Did you expect anything else? Did you actually think we were going to get something intelligent from him?

Just more third-grade behavior. Surprised he didn't use the mirror tecnique. Well, there's still time in this thread for that.


So when are you going to refute any of PMs articles that you have been dodging for over a month now slick? Oh yeah you can't.

As for childish behavior, that's a laugh coming from you and your childish rants about libs. Pot meet kettle.

[Cobra]

Maybe it's both, sun and CO2 spurred greenhouse effect. The suns gona destroy the planet one day anyways. Not gona worry about things i can't control. I think the global warming stuff may be a bit overblown but probably does exist with some merit. That's about all i got on the subject.

[Stoner]

As for nonsense behavior, you don't seem to mind it when it is a Retarded Neocon doing it. Biased much? Yep, you sure are and everyone sees it here. But I don't mind the brown ring on your neck, it looks good on you.


I too talked like this in the third grade.

Anything intelligent to add, El, or are you just going to post like normal?

[Elrathin]

I too talked like this in the third grade.

Anything intelligent to add, El, or are you just going to post like normal?


/yawn, wake me when you actually have something intelligent to say or refute.

[Labrocca]

So when are you going to refute any of PMs articles that you have been dodging for over a month now slick? Oh yeah you can't.

I already stated that NONE of us here are scientists (that I know of) and the best we can do is argue third hand material from other people. I can't refute papers that only have findings based on studies I can't see or worse...understand. Some of this science is well above the average joe.

I have taken a stance to simply post articles I find creditable as new threads. I suggest you either refute the OP and participate on-topic. Sidelining the debate of how the sun is warming the earth and NOT greenhouse gases just weakens your position.

[Stoner]

Here are some more articles showing a likely possibility that global warming is not man-made and probably has more to do with the sun than SUVs.

http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/03/03/2310250

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=20070315&articleId=5086

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/81720/global_warming_not_just_man_made.html

[Alonzo]

Stoner, might want to pull that last link:

Scientists think the earth is hotter than at anytime in the last 1,000 years. Humans are at least partly, probably mostly to blame for this. Emissions from cars, and industrial plants and many other sources are making the Earth hotter. They sit up there in the atmosphere and act like a big blanket, making the planet warmer.

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/81720/global_warming_not_just_man_made.html

All they did was make a disclaimer to the scientifically illiterate that the earths climate does change naturally.

[Labrocca]

I think that's important part of the debate though Zo...there is doubt and lots of it. It's guys like Gore that has created alarm and has set in stone that global warming is caused by humans via greenhouse gases and emmisions.

[CheesyMuslim]

Sorry bout that,

1. So its the sun eh?
2. Lemme get this right.
3. The Sun is very freakin hot!
4. And at times it has solar flares, sometimes more solar flares than other times.
5. Hummmm,.........
6. Lets talley up, The Sun is very Hot.
7. It in turn makes Earth hot.
8. Hummm,...........
9. Yep, its the Sun, if we didn't have the Sun we would be up sh!t creek!.
10. I wonder when we will see another huge volcano?
11. Its been said they tend to cool off the planet.
12. Here's an idea, why not let the neolib nuke a volcanic mountain to create an active volcano burst, cool off the planet, then take all the credit!


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[Labrocca]

Other planets in our Solar System are also experiencing global warming...I guess that's proof of life now we just need to find those highways on Mars.

[Stoner]

Other planets in our Solar System are also experiencing global warming...I guess that's proof of life now we just need to find those highways on Mars.


I listened to a scientist on the radio today talking about how even Pluto is experiencing warmer temperatures.

This is what kills me about these global warming conspiracy theories. All logic points to the sun and natural earth causes (volcanos, etc...) but there's those with a political agenda that want to ignore the obvious and point to theories that are very unlikely.

[lily]

I listened to a scientist on the radio today talking about how even Pluto is experiencing warmer temperatures.

This is what kills me about these global warming conspiracy theories. All logic points to the sun and natural earth causes (volcanos, etc...) but there's those with a political agenda that want to ignore the obvious and point to theories that are very unlikely.


I hate to state the obvious in this, stoner.....but you do know that the sun only heats the earth, don't you? Other planets have their own suns (stars).

[Cobra]

Umm the sun heats all the planets that orbit it, pluto include. Or am I not getting something. There are other stars but they don't really heat the suns orbiting planets much.

[lily]

I think that's important part of the debate though Zo...there is doubt and lots of it. It's guys like Gore that has created alarm and has set in stone that global warming is caused by humans via greenhouse gases and emmisions.


That is mainly because Gore is the most vocal an well known. Joe Schmoe scientist isn't going to get the audience, nor the funding to do what Gore does.

As I've said many times and why I hate getting into these discussions (but enjoy reading them), what is the harm in protecting the earth? The least that can happen is Gore was wrong and the most that can happen is that we've saved some energy and didn't pollute the earth as much.

[BoogyMan]

I listened to a scientist on the radio today talking about how even Pluto is experiencing warmer temperatures.

This is what kills me about these global warming conspiracy theories. All logic points to the sun and natural earth causes (volcanos, etc...) but there's those with a political agenda that want to ignore the obvious and point to theories that are very unlikely.


I hate to state the obvious in this, stoner.....but you do know that the sun only heats the earth, don't you? Other planets have their own suns (stars).


The sun heats all planets in THIS solar system Lily, not just the Earth.

The planets in our solar system are satellites of the Sun and all are warmed by the central Sun to a certain degree based on their distance from it.

[lily]

Umm the sun heats all the planets that orbit it, pluto include. Or am I not getting something. There are other stars but they don't really heat the suns orbiting planets much.



See.......and that is why I don't usually post in this topic! Can I have some salt for my crow?


In my defense......I've been out of school for a long time....and when I went I went to Catholic school.:P

[Alonzo]

but you do know that the sun only heats the earth, don't you? Other planets have their own suns (stars).

I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt here.....

I think that's important part of the debate though Zo...there is doubt and lots of it. It's guys like Gore that has created alarm and has set in stone that global warming is caused by humans via greenhouse gases and emmisions.

There isn't a lot of doubt. You have a relatively small group of scientists who dispute it, and it's a combination of wanting to make their voice heard and a group of the public desperate to get a scientist to agree with them. They sound louder than their numbers are. If you were to pick up some reputable scientific journals you'd find very little of their view.

[Stoner]

Here's a great article I came across. It shows how the sun is causing glaciers to melt and not CO2.

Al Gore says the world's glaciers are melting because humanity has emitted too much CO2.

However, a new peer-reviewed study shows that in South America's Andes Mountains the glaciers' advances and retreats have not been governed by CO2, but by small variations in the sun's intensity.

The study, led by P.J. Polissar of the University of Massachusetts, found that Andean glaciers expanded only four times during the 600 years of the Little Ice Age, which lasted from 1250 AD to 1850. Each of those glacier advances occurred during a solar minimum, when the sun's lowered activity apparently dropped the mountain-top temperatures by 2-4 degrees C and increased precipitation by about 20 percent.


Full article below.


Al Gore says the world's glaciers are melting because humanity has emitted too much CO2.

However, a new peer-reviewed study shows that in South America's Andes Mountains the glaciers' advances and retreats have not been governed by CO2, but by small variations in the sun's intensity.

The study, led by P.J. Polissar of the University of Massachusetts, found that Andean glaciers expanded only four times during the 600 years of the Little Ice Age, which lasted from 1250 AD to 1850. Each of those glacier advances occurred during a solar minimum, when the sun's lowered activity apparently dropped the mountain-top temperatures by 2-4 degrees C and increased precipitation by about 20 percent.

The Polissar team's report, "Solar Modulation of Little Ice Age Climate in the Tropical Andes," was recently published online in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

The team studied the glaciers' moraines—piles of rocks, soil, tree trunks and other glacial debris left behind when the glaciers retreated. Then they matched the glacial debris with the sediment layers in nearby mountain lakes. The pronounced seasonality in the Andes precipitation allows the researchers to count years in the sediments and precisely date the glacial advances.

The Andes glacier study not only links glacial advances and retreats with the sun, but emphasizes that the earth's glaciers have often retreated—and even disappeared—during past centuries, long before humans built cars and smokestacks.

Most of the Andes glaciers must have disappeared during the Holocene Warming that ended just 5,000 years ago. Temperatures then were as much as 2 degrees C warmer than today's. So far, the Modern Warming has produced about only 0.8 degrees C of total temperature rise in its 150 years.

The sun has been linked to earth's climate changes for the past 400 years—by sunspot records. Early astronomers noted that the two coldest periods of the Little Ice Age occurred when there were virtually no sunspots on the sun. The Sporer Minimum lasted from 1420 to 1570, and the Maunder Minimum from 1645 to 1710.

The solar-earth linkage came to the fore again in the 1980s, when researchers brought up the first long ice cores from Greenland and the Antarctic. The 400,000 years of temperature history contained in the ice cores clearly showed a moderate, natural cycle that raised temperatures at the latitude of New York and Paris by about 2 degrees C, and then lowered them by a similar amount. The cycles averaged about 1500 years in length. Carbon 14 and beryllium 10 isotopes in the ice clearly linked this temperature cycle to the sun.

The question for Al Gore is not whether our temperatures are rising; the key question is why they're rising. Antarctic ice cores tell us that temperatures and CO2 in the atmosphere have tracked closely together through recent Ice Ages, but the CO2 changes have lagged behind the temperature changes by about 800 years.

Higher temperatures have produced more atmospheric CO2, rather than CO2 producing higher temperatures! That's because most of the planet's CO2 is stored in the oceans, and as the seawater warms, it can't hold as much CO2.

If CO2 is the driving climate force, why did the earth begin warming in 1850, while human CO2 emissions didn't start to really expand until about 1940? Mr. Gore doesn't tell us the answer.

Why did the earth's temperatures decline from 1940 to 1975, even as CO2 emissions were soaring? Mr. Gore doesn't say.

How warm will New York get in the Modern Warming? Apparently Mr. Gore can't tell us, but a total of 2 degrees C seems likely based on the history in the ice cores.



http://www.mitosyfraudes.org/Calen6/InconGlac.html

[piratemonkey]

First off, your secondary source isn't the the peer-reviewed journal article. The writer of your secondary source article, Dennis T. Avery, is also an advocate of corporate farming who wrote this article: "Saving the Planet with Pesticides and Plastic." :rolleyes:
http://www.cgfi.org/about/davery_bio.htm



However, a new peer-reviewed study shows that in South America's Andes Mountains the glaciers' advances and retreats have not been governed by CO2, but by small variations in the sun's intensity.

The study, led by P.J. Polissar of the University of Massachusetts, found that Andean glaciers expanded only four times during the 600 years of the Little Ice Age, which lasted from 1250 AD to 1850. Each of those glacier advances occurred during a solar minimum, when the sun's lowered activity apparently dropped the mountain-top temperatures by 2-4 degrees C and increased precipitation by about 20 percent.



Maybe you should read the actual study, because it doesn't say what you and Mr. Avery think it says and the above description of the research is factually incorrect.

Mr. Avery can't even get the years studied right:
The underlying causes of late-Holocene climate variability in the tropics are incompletely understood. Here we report a 1,500-year reconstruction of climate history and glaciation in the Venezuelan Andes using lake sediments. Four glacial advances occurred between anno Domini (A.D.) 1250 and 1810...

In addition, this study only applies to glaciers in the tropical regions, which are very obviously going to be more influenced by solar variation.

...coincident with solar-activity minima. Temperature declines of -3.2 ± 1.4°C and precipitation increases of 20% are required to produce the observed glacial responses. These results highlight the sensitivity of high-altitude tropical regions to relatively small changes in radiative forcing, implying even greater probable responses to future anthropogenic forcing.

On top of all of that, the time-frame of this study ends before industrialization. Were those correlations between solar output variation and glacial advance maintained after industrialization? Or did industrialization and subsequent boost in CO2 levels accellerate glacial retreat?

Think about it, Stoner. How much did CO2 levels vary in the 1500 years of this study?

They almost didn't vary at all.
Look at the smaller insert graph in this link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Carbon_Dioxide_400kyr.png

Key point:
No place in the study does it say that CO2 levels since industrialization have not influenced temperature levels or glacial advance/retreat.

This is a valid study, it just doesn't support your position at all.
http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/short/0603118103v1

[sbannon]

There isn't a lot of doubt. You have a relatively small group of scientists who dispute it, and it's a combination of wanting to make their voice heard and a group of the public desperate to get a scientist to agree with them. They sound louder than their numbers are. If you were to pick up some reputable scientific journals you'd find very little of their view.
Zo, you give too much credit there. Those who sell their writings (and conclusions) to the highest bidder are far from deserving of the title scientists.

Very few, in fact none that I'm aware of, actual scientists dispute Global Warming or man's influence. Some believe there's more study needed to determine the extent of the problem and man's impact, but that's good, cautious science, it isn't the same as disputing it exists.

Until opponents begin posting actual peer-reviewed publishings from scientific journals that dispute Global Warming these discussions are pretty pointless in my opinion. They always seem to just fall to name calling.

The problem however, is there hasn't been a single peer-reviewed publishing made in any scientific journals that disputed Global Warming in over a decade. I wonder why that might be...

[BoogyMan]

I was under the understanding that we had all pretty much agreed that the planet was undergoing some warming now. Did I miss something?

I thought our major point of disagreement was on the cause of that warming.

[Achilles]

The thing you should all be doing is recognizing the problem, anaylzing ALL possible causes, which includes the possiblity of every global warming problem being man-made, and correct every possiblity.

Sadly, any of the evidence you all have shown cannot be trusted; the world is too populated with people who'll write false info and make it sound cool while being paid by those in power. Since none can be fully trusted, people need man-up, stop attempting to cover their ass, and finally lay this issue to rest.