Beam me to Planet Gore !
/johnny
It is amazing what will cause the global temperature to go up when you are the arbiter of what the temperature really is without any regard for real thermometers and satellite data.
I dunna know.
I wake up in the morning, it’s cool.
By the end of the day, it’s warm.
Must be all those cars spewing pollution.
Obviously.
I’ve posted this sentiment before, but every time I see an article about some “surprising” discovery by scientists, I get very skeptical and want to totally discount whatever it is that they’ve found that “surprised” them. Particularly in regards to climate.
Also, another very scarlet red flag: this broad works for... wait for it... “the Grantham Institute for Climate change”. Not the Grantham Institute for Climate Study or Grantham Institute for Climate Research, but “Climate change”. Doesn’t that make anyone just little suspicious of her bias or motives in pursuing her research?
If this was from some Institute for Solar Research or even Earth Atmospheric Sciences, maybe we could give it a little more weight, but then the famous Globull Warming line follows in the last paragraph- we need further studies on a longer timescale. Translation: we’re pulling all this out of our @$$es, but give us more grant $$$ and we’ll write up a nice report confirming anything you want us to. Just give us more money.
Personally, if they stated that they know for a fact that the sky is blue, I’d have to go outside to check because I sure as hell won’t believe a word they say.
Watt’s Up With That covered this:
Study sheds new light on how the sun affects the Earth’s climate
Posted on October 6, 2010 by Anthony Watts
This story was previously covered on Sept 24 on WUWT, but because it appeared in Nature today, everybody is exploding my inbox like maybe I’ve never seen it before. Thanks. ;-) So in hopes of avoiding more flooding, here it is again.
Be sure to read the essay by David Archibald on the Hathaway SC24 prediction.
Also please please pay attention to the bolded (mine) caveat by professor Haigh below about the duration of the study. Link to the paper follows also, though it is missing figures for some reason.
I suspect these scientists flunked Astronomy.
Some FACTOIDS:
We are closest to the sun in January
We are farthest from the sun in July
The axis the Earth tilts at determines the seasons
The Southern hemisphere is mostly water, so it reflects more heat in the winter; the opposite occurs in the summer because the earth absorbs more heat
So, less water in the oceans means more land exposed and hotter temperatures. More ice in the polar caps (i.e NOW) means less water in the ocean and more land is exposed. It’s all about reflection.
So simple a child could understand.
Considering we do not even know yet how dropping UV energy affects the heat content of the Earths surface, it is impossible to compare that metric to visible light affects. There may be numerous positive and negative feedback factors involved. Same can be said for Cosmic Ray Energy. All you can do is look at trends. The visible light output from the sun varies daily due to sunspot configurations. These variances are based on quantity and numerous other qualitative factors. For example, toward the end of the Solar Cycle the sunspots tend to be located near the equator. Thus their contribution to visible light in the plane of the Earth’s orbital path are greater. Looking at the visible light output of the sun to determine its energetic output is like looking at the temperature of the atmosphere to determine the atmospheres heat content. It has its limitations.
Thank you.
I’m an Internet Scientist ; ) and I am predicting snow in Tampa this winter. It would be the first time since 1974. My outdoor thermometer says 52 this am.
The study was conducted from 2004 to 2007 - - NOT during the solar minimum which included 2008 thru the present.
The average US winter temperatures dropped six degrees from 2000 to now.
Maybe they are using the wrong models.