Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

'No sun link' to climate change
BBC NEWS ^ | 2007/07/10 23:00:30 GMT | Richard Black

Posted on 07/10/2007 7:52:26 PM PDT by JohnA

A new scientific study concludes that changes in the Sun's output cannot be causing modern-day climate change.

It shows that for the last 20 years, the Sun's output has declined, yet temperatures on Earth have risen.

It also shows that modern temperatures are not determined by the Sun's effect on cosmic rays, as has been claimed.

Writing in the Royal Society's journal Proceedings A, the researchers say cosmic rays may have affected climate in the past, but not the present.

"This should settle the debate," said Mike Lockwood from the UK's Rutherford-Appleton Laboratory, who carried out the new analysis together with Claus Froehlich from the World Radiation Center in Switzerland.

Dr Lockwood initiated the study partially in response to the TV documentary The Great Global Warming Swindle, broadcast on Britain's Channel Four earlier this year, which featured the cosmic ray hypothesis.

"All the graphs they showed stopped in about 1980, and I knew why, because things diverged after that," he told the BBC News website.

"You can't just ignore bits of data that you don't like," he said.

Warming trend

The scientists' main approach on this new analysis was simple; to look at solar output and cosmic ray intensity over the last 30-40 years, and compare those trends with the graph for global average surface temperature, which has risen by about 0.4C over the period.

The Sun varies on a cycle of about 11 years between periods of high and low activity.

But that cycle comes on top of longer-term trends; and most of the 20th Century saw a slight but steady increase in solar output.

But in about 1985, that trend appears to have reversed, with solar output declining.

This paper re-enforces the fact that the warming in the last 20 to 40 years can't have been caused by solar activity Dr Piers Forster

Yet this period has seen temperatures rise as fast as, if not faster than, at any time during the previous 100 years.

"This paper re-enforces the fact that the warming in the last 20 to 40 years can't have been caused by solar activity," said Dr Piers Forster from Leeds University, a leading contributor to this year's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assessment of climate science.

Cosmic relief

The IPCC's February summary report concluded that greenhouse gases were about 13 times more responsible than solar changes for rising global temperatures.

But the organisation was criticised in some quarters for not taking into account the cosmic ray hypothesis, developed among others by Henrik Svensmark and Eigil Friis-Christensen of the Danish National Space Center.

Their theory holds that cosmic rays help clouds to form by providing tiny particles around which water vapour can condense. Overall, clouds cool the Earth.

During periods of active solar activity, cosmic rays are partially blocked by the Sun's more intense magnetic field. Cloud formation diminishes, and the Earth warms.

Mike Lockwood's analysis appears to have put a large, probably fatal nail in this intriguing and elegant hypothesis.

He said: "I do think there is a cosmic ray effect on cloud cover. It works in clean maritime air where there isn't much else for water vapour to condense around.

"It might even have had a significant effect on pre-industrial climate. But you cannot apply it to what we're seeing now, because we're in a completely different ball game."

Drs Svensmark and Friis-Christensen could not be reached for comment.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Government
KEYWORDS: change; climate; globalcooling; globalwarming; globalwarminghoax; grantmoney
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-102 next last

1 posted on 07/10/2007 7:52:29 PM PDT by JohnA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: JohnA
Drs Svensmark and Friis-Christensen could not be reached for comment.

I'll bet.
2 posted on 07/10/2007 7:54:04 PM PDT by cripplecreek (Greed is NOT a conservative ideal.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnA

What a load of crap...I guess the debate is over.


3 posted on 07/10/2007 7:54:44 PM PDT by halo66
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnA

There HAVE been major changes in climate within the short space of time between Julius Caesar and ourselves, and there is no conceivable way man could have caused any such thing prior to the 1800s at the earliest. The causes are natural whatever they are.


4 posted on 07/10/2007 7:55:25 PM PDT by rickdylan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnA
"cosmic rays may have affected climate in the past, but not the present."

Sure, and the dog ate my homework, too.

5 posted on 07/10/2007 7:56:08 PM PDT by norwaypinesavage (Planting trees to offset carbon emissions is like drinking water to offset rising ocean levels)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnA

You can violate the laws of man. You can violate the laws of God. You cannot violate the laws of physics. If sun activity caused climate change 300,000,000 years ago, it can do it again today. What a moron!


6 posted on 07/10/2007 7:56:11 PM PDT by GW and Twins Pawpaw (Sheepdog for Five [My grandkids are way more important than any lefty's feelings!])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnA

Bull friggin shiite.


7 posted on 07/10/2007 7:56:28 PM PDT by pissant (Duncan Hunter: Warrior, Statesman, Conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnA

“This should settle the debate.”

NOT.


8 posted on 07/10/2007 7:57:00 PM PDT by Tax Government (democRats: America's very own criminal Baaaa...Baaaath party.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnA

I suppose a super nova would have no effect either?


9 posted on 07/10/2007 7:57:47 PM PDT by Eaker (Free The Texas 3 - Ramos, Compean and Hernandez)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: halo66

I’m amazed. The scienticians have proved a negative. The sun COULDN’T be responsible for warming.


10 posted on 07/10/2007 7:58:12 PM PDT by boop (Trunk Monkey. Is there anything he can't do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: JohnA

Is there any evidence of warming occuring on other planets in our solar system?


11 posted on 07/10/2007 7:58:53 PM PDT by GBA (God Bless America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

Wonder if his parents were cousins?


12 posted on 07/10/2007 7:59:04 PM PDT by doc1019 (Fred Thompson '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: JohnA
So if the sun puffed out in ten minutes, tomorrow the temperature on earth would be the same?

These folks need to switch to sugar-free koolaid if they’re going to be drinking so much of it.

13 posted on 07/10/2007 7:59:04 PM PDT by Ghost of Philip Marlowe (Liberals are blind. They are the dupes of Leftists who know exactly what they're doing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnA

LMAO! Just when I thought these clowns couldn’t possibly have less credibility!


14 posted on 07/10/2007 8:00:00 PM PDT by airborne (COULTER: Actually, my favorite candidate is [Rep.] Duncan Hunter [R-CA], and he is magnificent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GBA

I hear Mars is warming....


15 posted on 07/10/2007 8:00:28 PM PDT by GW and Twins Pawpaw (Sheepdog for Five [My grandkids are way more important than any lefty's feelings!])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: JohnA

A great big cigar for Dr Lockwood, and deduct 5 carbon credits from his account.


16 posted on 07/10/2007 8:01:05 PM PDT by claudiustg (You know it. I know it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: doc1019

I don’t know but I suspect the writer didn’t bother looking for the guys who disagree.


17 posted on 07/10/2007 8:01:16 PM PDT by cripplecreek (Greed is NOT a conservative ideal.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: JohnA

Dumbest “study” ever.


18 posted on 07/10/2007 8:01:56 PM PDT by Theo (Global warming "scientists." Pro-evolution "scientists." They're both wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnA
Will they make up their minds already - after all, if the temperature rises on Mars in much the same fashion as on Earth, and the only shared environment is the sun, what else could be the likely explanation?

Oh, right, Mars has big dust storms, and nothing like that happens on Earth.

19 posted on 07/10/2007 8:01:59 PM PDT by kingu (No, I don't use sarcasm tags - it confuses people.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: norwaypinesavage

Your dog & mine, too.....


20 posted on 07/10/2007 8:02:24 PM PDT by texanyankee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-102 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson