New analysis counters claims that solar activity is linked to global warming

Guardian (England) ^ | July 11, 2007 | James Randerson

[liberallarry]

It has been one of the central claims of those who challenge the idea that human activities are to blame for global warming. The planet's climate has long fluctuated, say the climate sceptics, and current warming is just part of that natural cycle - the result of variation in the sun's output and not carbon dioxide emissions.

But a new analysis of data on the sun's output in the last 25 years of the 20th century has firmly put the notion to rest. The data shows that even though the sun's activity has been decreasing since 1985, global temperatures have continued to rise at an accelerating rate.

[an amused spectator]

My contention is that the scientists are true professionals, not laymen.

My professional field is very much less subjective than global climate modeling, but the discipline falls into many esoteric branches. Most people expect a professional in my field to know EVERYTHING about the field just because he/she is a practitioner. This is a patently untrue assumption.

Knowing this, I'm skeptical of bozos like this Randerson pompously announcing that I've got to pay attention to HIS "experts", 'cause "they've got a degree and stuff".

Big freaking deal.

[liberallarry]

That only means they get paid for doing whatever they do. It doesn't say anything about their competence, honesty, or impartiality.

Of course it does. Or do you really believe that those who pay are complete fools, that centuries of experience and effort designed to identify talent and train those who possess it count for nothing?

[agere_contra]

The reason why I could post up the data/graphs that I have done without fear of copyright violation is that they were paid for by the American taxpayer. I’m not talking about forcing free access to the various Zeitschriften.

[battlegearboat]

Why can’t somebody do something about that pesky sun of ours?

[Arrowhead1952]

Thanks for that link. I’d lost the web site and had an argument with a lib who says all weather stations are correctly placed. I need that to set him straight.

Believe me, he was probably glued to his TV all weekend watching Algore’s Lie (about) earth gore bull w0rming junk.

[drlevy88]

There are donated lunches, however; and data and theories are unlike a substance like food in that they can be shared with an unlimited number of people. Gummit subsidies are only one way and it’s not obvious they are the best. I wish enough people cared to create the equivalent of GNU for global temperature science. It deserves to be as feasible to look at the question firsthand as it is to download Linux.

[Fresh Wind]

Your (sic) confusing the reporting with the science.

A valid point, but, wasn't this piece written by a "professional" journalist? As such, how could it possibly be misleading?

[liberallarry]

You're right to be skeptical about Randerson. You should also be skeptical about those who oppose him, about most of the posters to this thread...because they know far, far less than the professionals.

The ultimate truth lies in the facts unearthed by experiment...and their interpretation and application. Unfortunately, much of that is not easily accessable to anyone, least of all to laymen.

[avacado]

"James Hansen, a Nasa climate scientist who was once gagged by the Bush administration for speaking out on global warming, said the issue of whether the sun's activity is causing global warming had been dispensed with by most scientists long ago."

James Hansen! This guy has more global warming grant money stuffed under his bed than he knows what to do with. He's Al Gore's little beotch!

[drlevy88]

Science is uncomfortably dependent upon sociology.

[liberallarry]

...wasn't this piece written by a "professional" journalist? As such, how could it possibly be misleading?

Yah...heh, heh. I leave that problem to you. :)

[an amused spectator]

because they know far, far less than the professionals.

Professionals in an EXTREMELY subjective "scienific" discipline - global climate modeling. I frankly don't think they have developed the tools to make the call yet.

[hocndoc]

Your comments are right on. How can anyone deny that the sun has a role to play in climate change? Didn’t we recently have an example of the changes due to increased sun spot activity on immediate temp change?

Here’s the abstract in question if anyone has a way to access it:
http://www.journals.royalsoc.ac.uk/content/h844264320314105/

I blogged on this subject Monday, and found this letter refuting the methodology and findings of that meta analysis from a few years ago that supposedly showed that no real scientist disagreed that humans cause all global warming.
http://www.staff.livjm.ac.uk/spsbpeis/Scienceletter.htm

[ripley]

“you seem to be suffering from the same limitations as levy”

very strange. disagreement with a liberal brings condescension, denigration, insult. (make sure the nails in those boots don’t hurt your toes.)

(don’t liberals ever become tired of being intellectually, morally and in all ways superior to the rest of imperfect humanity?)

[expat_panama]

we can get our own numbers, confirm them by taking our own measurements, and then do our own analysis.

No IPCC grant for you!

LOL!!  It's the same with so many issues these days and it all grinds down to who we believe, those really smart people on TV or our own lying eyes.

[liberallarry]

Hint;

There are also professional astrologers, professional thieves, professional phrenologists, and professional A-holes.

[DustyMoment]

Translation: Don’t look at the scientific facts - believe our BS and Al Gore. WE know better than real climatologists!!!

[drlevy88]

And professional psychoanalysts — a good example of taking a valid subject of study and surrounding it with the screwiest theories possible.

[olezip]

But a new analysis of data on the sun's output in the last 25 years of the 20th century has firmly put the notion to rest.

The new analysis has NOT firmly put the notion to rest. The "new" analysis only focuses on the Sun's magnetic field activity. There is more to the Sun's role in global warming that just magnetic field activity, plus even that has a range of physical reactions. Plus there is scientific evidence that the Sun has gotten a bit hotter this current solar cycle. It is a multidimensional phenomenon that requires systems analysis to sort out, IMO.

[agere_contra]

Which means they are aware of, and have considered, any and all arguments which laymen can raise.

These guys are truly like unto Gods! They must already know why the temperature was so warm in 1000 AD, and why it just doesn't matter. I sure hope they get round to telling us.