In your face, deniers: Sunspots do NOT cause climate change

[Louisiana1976]

snip

There is no correlation between global warming and solar activity, and no correlation between cloud cover and cosmic rays. The flaws were first identified by Peter Laut, a Danish scientist who was once science adviser to the Danish Energy Agency. Laut, now retired, demonstrated in a study first aired in 2000 and published in a peer-reviewed journal in 2003 that both graphs contained serious errors. When these flaws were corrected, the apparent correlations between global warming and solar activity, and cosmic rays and cloud cover, disappeared. Et Voila.

snip

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/12/14/813982/-In-Your-Face,-Deniers:-Sunspots-do-NOT-Cause-Climate-Change

[Nederland]

1. Old news

I mean really, a post that brings up a paper published in 2003 that refutes a paper published in 1998?

[stuntcat]

3. why are the haters still using it?

part of being "conservative" maybe, longing for the past LOL

[Nederland]

4. Because everybody seeks simple answers

People want simple answers:

CO2 is causing global warming.

Sunspots cause global warming.

The truth, that climate changes in response to a large number of complicated and inter-related forcings is just to hard to grasp, so we simplify things so they can fit on a headline.

[joshcryer]

11. Physics isn't simple, but CO2 does absorb and emit IR that other atmospheric...

...chemicals does not (except for other greenhouse gases of course). It's a simple enough answer for the layman, but then, the layman is easily convinced about conspiracies, too, so it is kind of a double edged sword.

[Nederland]

13. It's a simple answer that distorts reality

The reality is that there are positive forcings and negative forcings, and they inter-relate and have feedbacks so complicated very few (I would say no one) really understands them.

[bhikkhu]

12. Short memory spans

Anything that hasn't been refuted in the past 30 minutes is back in play.

[Birthmark]

2. Further reading on the inadequacy of the Sun...

...as the culprit behind the current warming can be found here: http://www.skepticalscience.com/solar-activity-sunspots-global-warming.htm

[bergie321]

5. Duh

This was the 5th warmest year on record in a year with very low sunspot activity.

[Spoonman]

7. Try again,

revised NASA data shows the following as the 6 warmest years on record.

1921 +1.15
1931 +0.99
1934 +1.26
1998 +1.29
1999 +1.05
2006 +1.29

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/Fig.D.txt

[Viking12]

8. The Contiguous 48 now equals the globe?

When did that happen? How does >2% of the Earth's surface suddenly become representative of the whole?

[TxRider]

6. It's simplistic thinking

The sun is responsible for 100% of global warming.

Without it we would be quite cold indeed, an ice ball in space.

Variation in our orbit that causes increases or decreases in the sun's warming cause ice ages as well.

It's all in the way the sun warms us, and the radiative heat going back out to space and the green house effect added to the solar warming to make it warmer than it otherwise would be.

All sun spots do is signal that the sun is sending more heat our way.

The scientists just believe that the change in solar radiation as we can measure it isn't enough to explain the current warming.

Deniers want to think it is.

Other skeptic want to go back over our temp records to make sure we have actually seen as much warming as scientists say we have. To double check the math and science. We're only talking one degree over 100 years after all, with a margin of error almost that large.

[pscot]

9. New sunspot cycle 24

appears to be getting underway.


NEW SUNSPOT: A sunspot is growing rapidly in the sun's northern hemisphere. It appears to be a member of new Solar Cycle 24. Readers with solar telescopes should train their optics on the sun to witness sunspot genesis in action ?

[joshcryer]

10. Been hearing this for years. On one side I do hope this long minimum is ending...

...since it would result in one crazy ass El Nino next year that will blow minds (1998 was preceded by a cool period), and denialists will at least be shut up somewhat. But on the other hand I hope it doesn't, because we as a species need as much time as we can get.