Climate change is not caused by solar output

[King Cnvt]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6290228.stm

A new scientific study concludes that changes in the Sun's output cannot be causing modern-day climate change.

It shows that for the last 20 years, the Sun's output has declined, yet temperatures on Earth have risen.

It also shows that modern temperatures are not determined by the Sun's effect on cosmic rays, as has been claimed.

Writing in the Royal Society's journal Proceedings A, the researchers say cosmic rays may have affected climate in the past, but not the present.

"This should settle the debate," said Mike Lockwood from the UK's Rutherford-Appleton Laboratory, who carried out the new analysis together with Claus Froehlich from the World Radiation Center in Switzerland.

Dr Lockwood initiated the study partially in response to the TV documentary The Great Global Warming Swindle, broadcast on Britain's Channel Four earlier this year, which featured the cosmic ray hypothesis.

"All the graphs they showed stopped in about 1980, and I knew why, because things diverged after that," he told the BBC News website.

"You can't just ignore bits of data that you don't like," he said.


There you have it at last. Conclusive and final proof.

I'm sure that lays that to rest here with no further debate required.

[andy]

I don't believe them

[Let-Me-In]

I don't think there is any global warming. I think it is a scare tictac!!!

[MrRobin]

This debate will never end... for every 'fact' someone else can come up with a counter 'fact'

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6290228.stm
It shows that for the last 20 years, the Sun's output has declined, yet temperatures on Earth have risen.

Link "The energy output from the Sun has increased significantly during the 20th century, according to a new study."

[dang65]

This debate will never end... for every 'fact' someone else can come up with a counter 'fact'

Link "The energy output from the Sun has increased significantly during the 20th century, according to a new study."

Those facts don't contradict each other. One says "output from the Sun has increased significantly during the 20th century", the other says "for the last 20 years, the Sun's output has declined". That's why The Great Global Warming Swindle conveniently cut their graph off in 1980. In the meantime, with solar output declining, "this period has seen temperatures rise as fast as, if not faster than, at any time during the previous 100 years."

[Numptycorner]

Whatever argument says I have to do nothing is fact

[Let-Me-In]

It's a gravy train for life for scientists... bit like the Answer to the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe and Everything...

42?

[MrRobin]

Those facts don't contradict each other. One says "output from the Sun has increased significantly during the 20th century", the other says "for the last 20 years, the Sun's output has declined". That's why The Great Global Warming Swindle conveniently cut their graph off in 1980. In the meantime, with solar output declining, "this period has seen temperatures rise as fast as, if not faster than, at any time during the previous 100 years."

OK, so it increased from 1900 to 1987 and since then, for the last 20 years, it has been declining. You'd still get the warming effect whilst the equilibrium catches up - a bit like how summer solstice is 24th June but the hottest days are usually around August time.

I dunno, I'm no scientist, I'm not saying I'm right and this new study is wrong, I'm just saying that here's yet another study says something else and dazzles you with new data and figures etc...

[Numptycorner]

OK, so it increased from 1900 to 1987 and since then, for the last 20 years, it has been declining. You'd still get the warming effect whilst the equilibrium catches up - a bit like how summer solstice is 24th June but the hottest days are usually around August time.

I dunno, I'm no scientist, I'm not saying I'm right and this new study is wrong, I'm just saying that here's yet another study says something else and dazzles you with new data and figures etc...

The problem we have is the media usually misreport scientific data and the public get confused. Sometimes they do it intentionally, but mostly not, they just simply don't understand it. What we have to work with is weight of scientific evidence, the more we have, the more likely it's true and visa versa.

[dang65]

I dunno, I'm no scientist, I'm not saying I'm right and this new study is wrong, I'm just saying that here's yet another study says something else and dazzles you with new data and figures etc...

But the other studies don't say something else. Read through both those reports and they basically say the same thing - there is no link between solar output and long term climate change. The only people that are saying otherwise are routinely discredited. They are maverick nutcases, but they are the ones people believe, or at least accept as "the alternative point-of-view".