Posted on 07/11/2007 3:40:02 AM PDT by 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.
(Excerpt) Read more at guardian.co.uk ...
I doubt the Guardian's data. Variation in insolation (incident solar radiation) is the only factor that can explain the mediaeval warm period and the little ice age. The Guardian is printing nonsense.
Our sun is a variable star. Turn off the sun or block a portion of it’s output and tell me global warming has nothing to do with the sun.
Actually, it’s the opposition which is far more often motivated by ideology and monetary worries...and the Bush administration is dominated by such views.
Why is anyone even giving “The Guardian” the time of day?
GW is a multi-billion dollar gravy train for scietists that believe.
Your statement does nothing to answer the question as to where the data he used originated. I’m sure you’ll be distressed to discover that a great deal of the data proving global warming exists is obtained from the ground based stations. Guess the professionals didn’t get the word. As for your contention that the general public are idiots, I won’t dispute that since the majority accept the global warming claims of Al Gore et al at face value.
money can’t buy happiness, but its acute absence does tend to bring about misery
You mean monetary worries, like the destruction of Western Civilizations’ economy, PERHAPS in hopes of MAYBE effecting .7 degrees difference?
Yeah, I’d say that’s a fair trade off.
Poverty is the greatest polluter. This is historically documented and demonstrated daily.
With respect - and I'm on your side with this - doesn't most atmospheric CO2 come from oceanic outgassing? The oceans contains colossal amounts of CO2 some of which is released in an average ~ 800 yr lag after a period of high insolation. The famous Vostok Ice core data shows this lag:
Because NASA has extensive research proving that the SUN is raising temperatures across our entire Solar System. We have experienced INCREASED Solar bombardment on the ISS (trying to figure out how to keep our guys from frying on a trip to Mars).
It is in the 2017 to 2020 window that the Suns output is predicted to plummet and sink us into another ice age... Also New data out yesterday PROVES that the ICE SHELF in Greenland NEVER MELTED during the last WARMING PERIOD 100,000 years ago... WHEN IT WAS 9 degrees (F) higher average than today. It is ALL BS!
LLS
“has finally put the notion to rest.”
translation:
if you accept any ozzer point of view ve vill be forced to re-educate you.
There is NO global thermometer. No one is making anything but a wild guess as to any number that is a claimed to be a “global” temperature.
True...damn poor reporting by the Guardian.
Here's a better reference to it. Still not perfect (I didn't want to take the time to track it down completely) but at least you know where to look.
If it’s gore-BULL warming... it’s all BULLS***.
LLS
It said firmly..... how much more do you want /sarc
Studies reported in the Guardian. Whatever would lefties do without them.
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.
