[roaddog727]

Bump for reference

[libertylover]

Mr. Abdussamatov concedes manmade gasses may have made "a small contribution to the warming in recent years, but it cannot compete with the increase in solar irradiance."

Exactly.

[ZinGirl]

I haven't left my SUV idling on any of those planets or moons. Honest, I haven't.

well, somebody obviously has. duh. that makes more sense than actually considering that the SUN might have something to do with global warming.

;P

[midway]

EXCELLENT - THE ANTI INCONVENIENT TRUTH

1hour 15 minutes - pass it on

The Great Global Warming Swindle

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9005566792811497638&hl=en

[Raycpa]

Maybe we can strap all the SUV's together on a tether tied to the earth and move the earth a few more feet away from the sun.

[GBA]

What a bunch of tripe. The sun makes things warmer here on earth and on other plantets??? C'mon, that's quite a stretch, don't you think? Why, just about every climatologist says humans make earth warm and those who don't are going to have their license revoked, as it should be. Global warming is caused by the sun?!? Hahahahaha....too funny.

[relictele]

Someone needs to send this writer to a political reeducation camp (read: an American university).

It is just sooooooo boring for a pierced, tattooed, self-mutilated DUer living in their parents' basement or in a cereal-box flat somewhere in the suburbs to believe that the huge, unpredictable nuclear reaction known as the sun could be responsible. It's much easier and seductive to blame that nice SUV that dwarfs their old Dodge Neon.

[palmer]

The article conflates two phenomenon, the increasing solar irradiance that could also warm other planets and the variations in magnetic activity as measured by the sunspots. The increasing irradiance is very slow and would cause only a fraction of a degree rise here (and other planets) over hundreds of years. The magnetic activity could influence earth's weather and climate by modulating cosmic rays or some other mechanism, but it is doubtful that the same mechanisms would apply to other planets. The other issue is that earth's weather and climate lacks any significant 22 year cycle to match up to the sunspot cycle.

In short, the big changes in sunspots are interesting and could be significant, especially for the little ice age. The correlation of our climate with other planets is weak and probably has little to do with the sun.

[xcamel]

FReepmail me to get on or off
Click on POGW graphic for full GW rundown

---

[montag813]

And I swear, I haven't left my SUV idling on any of those planets or moons. Honest, I haven't.

Dick Cheney and the Halliburton board have been taking secret trips to Jupiter, eating beans and farting in the Jovian atmosphere.

[montag813]

Does the "Swindle" movie feature the solar proof?

[Halgr]

Thanks for the excellent post....I'm forwarding this to Friends ;-)

[wolfcreek]

Oh! The author shouldn't confuse the argument with facts like that! ALGORE will have him discredited.

[adm5]

This article is just more "non-believer" rhetoric.

Manbearpig is thuper therial.

[Carry_Okie]

Great synopsis.

[Arrowhead1952]

I wonder if any of this will be questioned by Algore and his crew? This is the type of proof to counter the BS that he is shouting and profiting from and he should be ashamed of his behavior.

[rickdylan]

Part of the problem is that if stars really are thermonuclear engines as we've been taught all our lives, there would be no reason to think they would heat up and cool off periodically.

There is however a growing body of evidence that stars are basically electrical and plasma-physics phenomena and not thermonuclear engines.

If as some of these proponents claim stars actually act like lightning rods or focal points of cosmic plasma discharge, then you would EXPECT them to heat up and cool off periodically as they move through regions of space with lesser or greater electrical potential difference from themselves.

That would be game, set, and match against the man-made warming freaks.

[JustDoItAlways]

The Sun clearly has cycles. It is not the never-changing monolith that some think and the global warming crowd trumpets.

The Sun clearly has an 11 year cycle. That 11 year cycle is really composed of 2 related 11 year cycles making another 22 year cycle. Those cycles vary considerably in size and length.

The Sun clearly has at least one longer cycle. The Maunder Minimum of 400 years ago shows the Sun might have fairly large variations over longer time scales.

The 100,000 year ice age cycle is likely affected by solar variation as much as changes in the earth's orbit.

The climate change community puts the variance at 0.1%. Why they discount it so much is obvious.

[Darnright]

Bumped and Bookmarked