Replies

Because the less climate variability there has been in the past and the less solar variability there has been in the past, then the 0.6C increase of the last 100 years must be due 100% to increasing C02.

Your premise is wrong here. 30-50% of the warming from the 1900s into the 1930s is attributed to an increase in solar output.

And they never, ever want to bring up the 30 ice ages we have had over the last 3.0 million years.

That's not true. It's very important to understand the ice ages (particularly the Pleistocene glacial/interglacial epochs), because we are currently in a very stable warm interglacial period, and human activities are adding a component to the global climate system (atmospheric CO2) that will contribute to even warmer temperatures.

It is too bad that so many have fallen for it already. It is up to me and you and FR and others to get the REAL FACTS out, so start now.

First of all, try to get your facts straight.

Funny, I thought the article said:

This basically rules out the sun as the cause of global warming," Henk Spruit, a co-author of the report from the Max Planck Institute in Germany, told Reuters.

Then I thought the article goes on to say:

"Overall, we can find no evidence for solar luminosity variations of sufficient amplitude to drive significant climate variations on centennial, millennial or even million-year timescales," the report said.

I would therefore ask you to get your facts straight when you are quoting what the global warming crowd is saying.