iOS app Android app
Clicking Follow Back will add user to your friends list and may allow access to your Social News timeline..

HuffPost Social News

Badges:
Your Badges and the Badge Module will be removed from your profile

amirlach's Comments

View Comments:   Sort:
next
1 - 25
Climate Change: Doing Nothing Will Cost More Than Preventative Measures, New Report Shows

Climate Change: Doing Nothing Will Cost More Than Preventative Measures, New Report Shows

Commented May 8, 2011 at 14:14:06 in Green

“If you read and understood it then your NCEP question was already answered.

The Wind Speed Theory is still very much contested. And actually is not a new avenue of research. http://pielkeclimatesci.wordpress.com/2008/06/02/use-of-winds-to-diagnose-long-term-temperature-trends-two-new-papers/ http://pielkeclimatesci.wordpress.com/2010/09/17/conclusions-from-allen-and-sherwood-2008-and-thorne-2008-are-refuted/

One of the contested ideas is that Models have Solved the Calibration problems. http://pielkeclimatesci.wordpress.com/2008/06/04/comments-on-the-science-in-the-nature-paper-by-allen-and-sherwood/ "While climate models are valuable tools they cannot prove anything! They are just hypotheses as to how the climate system works. The authors ignore peer reviewed papers that support the analyses of the temperature trends using the UAH MSU data."

http://www.mdpi.com/2072-4292/2/9/2148/pdf

I have some trouble accepting models and theory over direct observations. They might point out areas the data might be lacking or uncertain but are far from proof.”
Climate Change: Doing Nothing Will Cost More Than Preventative Measures, New Report Shows

Climate Change: Doing Nothing Will Cost More Than Preventative Measures, New Report Shows

Commented May 8, 2011 at 10:36:35 in Green

“So apperantly you never even read the Paper you presented as proof? http://dust.ess.uci.edu/rjallen/Publications_files/AllenShNatGeo08.pdf From the first Paragraph. "Warming patterns are consistent with model predictions
except for small discrepancies close to the tropopause. Our findings are inconsistent with the trends derived from radiosonde
temperature datasets and from NCEP reanalyses of temperature and wind fields. The agreement with models increases confidence
in current model-based predictions of future climate change."

And this Keeper is from the Conclusions. "Most importantly, we conclude that observed changes in
wind seem to be consistent with those predicted by models
given sampling and other uncertainties, supporting previous
suggestions that discrepancies between predicted and observed
upper-tropospheric warming are due to problems remaining in the
temperature records."

Basically back to the Models and Theory are correct and the Data is not argument.

I actually read the paper you presented.”
Climate Change: Doing Nothing Will Cost More Than Preventative Measures, New Report Shows

Climate Change: Doing Nothing Will Cost More Than Preventative Measures, New Report Shows

Commented May 7, 2011 at 17:19:41 in Green

“Firstly i'm Canadian not American. And secondly the paper i referenced is not in any way related to oil production but to trends in fish populations correlated to climate changes over 1400 years. Is there a problem with the data presented other than it was done by Russians?

Truth in politics is far different than truth in science. I'm more interested in seeing the science being tested and debated in an open and honest way. Not hidden behind FOIA walls and Gatekeepers. Especially publicly funded research used to justify major policy changes. When results can be independantly replicated and tested ill consider it more credulous.”
Climate Change: Doing Nothing Will Cost More Than Preventative Measures, New Report Shows

Climate Change: Doing Nothing Will Cost More Than Preventative Measures, New Report Shows

Commented May 7, 2011 at 09:47:56 in Green

“" They'll also be answerable for conspiracy to defraud the federal government­, ie to continue to receive federal handouts."

So will Mike Mann and Co. If ol Kenny boy ever gets his hands on those records.

Academic freedom only seems to protect warmists.
Then go missing in action on the "academic freedom" front when Greenpeace demanded the records of Mann's former UVA colleague, Patrick Michaels, a climate alarmism skeptic.

It's exactly this sort of deception and hypocrisy that is turning public support away from AGW. If he had nothing to hide he wouldn't.”

absolument on May 7, 2011 at 18:15:51

“No climate data are being kept secret.”
Climate Change: Doing Nothing Will Cost More Than Preventative Measures, New Report Shows

Climate Change: Doing Nothing Will Cost More Than Preventative Measures, New Report Shows

Commented May 7, 2011 at 09:34:00 in Green

“So a Peer Reviewed Paper refuting the Wind Speed Sensors are better than thermometers crock, which was also confirmed by NOAA's NCEP btw is still not enough to convince you? Funny how themometers were quite adequate to measure temperature since the 1700's.

Only when they failed to produce the desired results Warmists wanted were they replaced.

The head of the IPCC is an ADMINISTRA­TOR and a choo-choo train engineer. But hey as long as he parrots the warmist party line you will listen.

Funny how you Co2 Sophists will try to discredit an expert who points out flaws in the Generalist field of "Climatoligy", like mathimaticians and statisticians, or even Carbon Accounting experts. Then gladly parrot those non-climatoligists who say what you want to hear.

Saying that Evans who helped write the Carbon accounting Models is "talking out of his hat" is a stretch even for you. He was on the inside and seen the data. I assume you have more evidence to back that up?”
Climate Change: Doing Nothing Will Cost More Than Preventative Measures, New Report Shows

Climate Change: Doing Nothing Will Cost More Than Preventative Measures, New Report Shows

Commented May 5, 2011 at 22:52:01 in Green

“Just to Clarify the "NCEP" Reanalysis of the data was done by NCEP which is the National Centers for Enviromental Prediction. http://www.ncep.noaa.gov/
Climate Change: Doing Nothing Will Cost More Than Preventative Measures, New Report Shows

Climate Change: Doing Nothing Will Cost More Than Preventative Measures, New Report Shows

Commented May 5, 2011 at 22:43:07 in Green

“It's not just her saying this.Dr David Evans consulted full-time for the Australian Greenhouse Office (now the Department of Climate Change) from 1999 to 2005, and part-time 2008 to 2010, modeling Australia’s carbon in plants, debris, mulch, soils, and forestry and agricultural products. Evans is a mathematician and engineer, with six university degrees including a PhD from Stanford University in electrical engineering. The area of human endeavor with the most experience and sophistication in dealing with feedbacks and analyzing complex systems is electrical engineering, and the most crucial and disputed aspects of understanding the climate system are the feedbacks. The evidence supporting the idea that CO2 emissions were the main cause of global warming reversed itself from 1998 to 2006, causing Evans to move from being a warmist to a skeptic.

The paper you present says that "Surprisingly", direct temperature observations from radiosonde and satellite data have often not shown this expected trend." And that "Our findings are inconsistent with the trends derived from radiosonde
temperature datasets and from NCEP reanalyses of temperature and wind fields. The agreement with models increases confidence
in current model-based predictions of future climate change." http://pielkeclimatesci.wordpress.com/2010/09/17/conclusions-from-allen-and-sherwood-2008-and-thorne-2008-are-refuted/

So basically while reality based empirical temperature measures disagree with their theory, the Models do agree so of course the models are correct and the data is not.”
Climate Change: Doing Nothing Will Cost More Than Preventative Measures, New Report Shows

Climate Change: Doing Nothing Will Cost More Than Preventative Measures, New Report Shows

Commented May 5, 2011 at 16:41:29 in Green

“Ahh yes. The 40,000 or so Weather Ballons per month since 1970. which measure temprtature to a tenth of a degree failed to find the 2-3 degree hotspot the AGW models all predicted. So bodging on some wind speed data suddenly Finds it? http://joannenova.com.au/2010/07/sherwood-2008-where-you-can-find-a-hot-spot-at-zero-degrees/ "With poor resolution and a carefully chosen color scale the top graphs give the glancing impression that models aren’t doing too badly. But the color scale above is not just counter intuitive, it actively prevents anyone from comparing the trend in the upper troposphere with the surface. Any warming trend at all is “red”. Trend information is lost within the graph. Peek closely at the scale of the graph. Note the color of zero – that’s right — if there was no global warming in the entire atmosphere, no change, nothing at all happening, the Sherwood interpretation would look like one giant hot-spot."

The questionable color scale notwithstanding , even with wind gauges measuring temperatures, Sherwood still can’t guarantee there’s a hot spot. Simply Implying you may have found one is not proof.

The Models predicted a Hot Spot and an increase in humidity. What was found was a slightly cooler spot and lower humidity. Observations show steadily dropping relative humidity since the 1940s.

The model predictions were wrong on both the Hot Spot and Humidity.”

absolument on May 8, 2011 at 12:01:16

“Sure I read it. I even understood it! Including the reason that radiosonde data are KNOWN to be biased. These authors did not create a problem in order to wedge measurements into the Theory, they solved a known problem with radiosonde temperature measurements. And when they solved the calibration problem, the accurate temperature data they obtained matches the Theory.”

absolument on May 7, 2011 at 18:20:36

“"confirmed by NOAA's NCEP"

Post the URL where NCEP confirms Evans' claims.

"So a Peer Reviewed Paper refuting the Wind Speed Sensors are better than thermomete­rs crock, which was also confirmed by NOAA's NCEP btw is still not enough to convince you?"

NCEP never really did any such thing, did it?”

absolument on May 5, 2011 at 17:34:57

“Joanne Nova doesn't know w t f she's talking about, so she yammers on about the color scheme.

You don't know w t f you're talking about either, so you parrot Joanne Nova.”
Climate Change: Doing Nothing Will Cost More Than Preventative Measures, New Report Shows

Climate Change: Doing Nothing Will Cost More Than Preventative Measures, New Report Shows

Commented May 5, 2011 at 12:19:50 in Green

“The Paper says that the late-twentieth-century
warming can only be reproduced in the MODELs with anthropogenic forcing (mainly GHGs). Models do not prove or rule out anything, they just reflect assumptions and programming skills. The Model assumptions regarding AGW have been refuted by observations.

That is a far cry from RULING OUT natural, internal climate cycles as the main cause of the recent warming in the thermometer record.

The fact remains that recent Climate is not unusual in any way compared to past events. This paper explains the Internal Climate Variational observations over the last 1400 years.
http://alexeylyubushin.narod.ru/Climate_Changes_and_Fish_Productivity.pdf

Fig.2.23. Shows the natural 50–60-year periodicity of temperature fluctuations
dominated over the recent 1500 years and projects the observed recent cooling.

Table 2 shows the Correlation between Global dT and World Fuel Consumption (WFC) in different time periods of 1860–2000”
Climate Change: Doing Nothing Will Cost More Than Preventative Measures, New Report Shows

Climate Change: Doing Nothing Will Cost More Than Preventative Measures, New Report Shows

Commented May 5, 2011 at 10:47:44 in Green

“By the energy it emits. How can you detect a body that emits no radiation? If it does not re-emit energy how could it warm another body?”

absolument on May 5, 2011 at 11:11:30

“That's no answer and you know it.

It is not re-emitted *immediately* and if it was, we could never say that it had been *absorbed* in the first place. If a photon changed direction *immediately* like you say, we'd call it "reflection" or "deflection" by the CO2 molecule. What really happens next when CO2 in the atmosphere absorbs infrared, is it has a probability of re-emitting, and a probability of transferring its energy by collision to another molecule, and if that molecule is O2 or N2, those molecules don't radiate IR at all, so the heat is "trapped" and that is how the greenhouse effect works.

You could have looked this up yourself, if you were interested in learning how things actually work. But instead you presume to debate science without even knowing it. You are not an honest person.”
Climate Change: Doing Nothing Will Cost More Than Preventative Measures, New Report Shows

Climate Change: Doing Nothing Will Cost More Than Preventative Measures, New Report Shows

Commented May 5, 2011 at 10:08:55 in Green

“You mean the Hot Spot all the AGW models predicted as the Fingerprint of the Manmade Greenhouse Gas Warming? The lack of a predicted hotspot proves AGW theory false. Clearly the WaterVapor Feedback Assumptions are refuted by empirical evidence.

The signifcance of 16 years of cooling was calculated by the Warmists themselves. See the Link to the NOAA report above. None of the Models predicted a pause or even reversal of cooling for such an extended period of time, a decade or more. This also refutes AGW theory.

You can read about it here in greater detail from a Carbon Accounting Modeller. http://berfofanation.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474979205593

When a theory is proven wrong you change the theory not the data.”
Climate Change: Doing Nothing Will Cost More Than Preventative Measures, New Report Shows

Climate Change: Doing Nothing Will Cost More Than Preventative Measures, New Report Shows

Commented May 4, 2011 at 21:10:44 in Green

“Recent Peer review papers on the solar earth climate connection.
Long-term solar activity as a controlling factor for global warming in the 20th century, Geomagnetism and Aeronomy, Volume 49, Number 8, pp. 1271-1274, December 2009) - V. A. Dergachev, O. M. Raspopov

A solar pattern in the longest temperature series from three stations in Europe (Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics, Volume 72, Issue 1, pp. 62-76, January 2010) - Jean-Louis Le Mouel, Vladimir Kossobokov, Vincent Courtillot

Solar Minima, Earth’s rotation and Little Ice Ages in the past and in the future: The North Atlantic�European case (Global and Planetary Change, January 2010) - Nils-Axel Morner

Solar activity and climatic variability in the time interval from 10 to 250 Ma ago (Geomagnetism and Aeronomy, Volume 50, Number 2, pp. 141-152, April 2010) - O. M. Raspopov et al.

A statistically significant signature of multi-decadal solar activity changes in atmospheric temperatures at three European stations (Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics, Volume 72, Issues 7-8, pp. 595-606, May 2010) - Vladimir Kossobokov, Jean-Louis Le Mouel and Vincent Courtillot”
Climate Change: Doing Nothing Will Cost More Than Preventative Measures, New Report Shows

Climate Change: Doing Nothing Will Cost More Than Preventative Measures, New Report Shows

Commented May 4, 2011 at 21:09:19 in Green

http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2010/06/more-on-solar-controversy.html

"The claim of the IPCC, that human influence is much greater than natural changes, will be by the numbers not supported and must be considered incorrect. This is supported by the last graph, which shows a clear correlation between total solar radiation and sunspots.

Consequently, the scientists in charge of the ACRIM missions (http://www.acrim.com/) come to the following statement:
"The Earth's weather and climate regime is determined By The total solar irradiance (TSI) and its interactions with the Earth's atmosphere, oceans and land masses. TSI proxies during the past 400 years and the records of surface temperature show that TSI variation has been the dominant forcing for climate change during the industrial era. ".
Dr. rer.nat. B. Huettner (physicist) for EIKE"”
Climate Change: Doing Nothing Will Cost More Than Preventative Measures, New Report Shows

Climate Change: Doing Nothing Will Cost More Than Preventative Measures, New Report Shows

Commented May 3, 2011 at 10:43:45 in Green

“A more recent Paper by Lockwood seems to refute that. http://www.suite101.com/content/new-scientist-does-about-turn-on-global-warming-a226274

"Lockwood and his team have identified that recent cold British winters have coincided neatly with the biggest fall off in the Sun's activity for a century. This study noted that in 2008-9 sunspots virtually disappeared from the sun's surface while at the same time the solar magnetic field dropped to 150-year record lows. Lockwood predicts colder future temperatures, not warmer, based on the Sun's cyclical drop in activity."

http://www.suite101.com/content/new-scientist-does-about-turn-on-global-warming-a226274
Climate Change: Doing Nothing Will Cost More Than Preventative Measures, New Report Shows

Climate Change: Doing Nothing Will Cost More Than Preventative Measures, New Report Shows

Commented May 3, 2011 at 10:18:23 in Green

“So called "sCeptical Science" is nothing more than a missinformation site that censors contrary views. Zero Credibility.

The IPCC's Single Solar Scientist rewrote the satellite records to show a lower solar effect than what was actually measured despite the protests of the scientists who collected it. Judith Lean, along with Claus Frohlich is responsible for the scandalous rewriting graphs of solar activity. Satelity ukazovaly, že TSI (měřeno ve Wattech) mezi lety 1986 a 96 vzrostla asi o třetinu. Satellites show that the TSI (measured in watts) between 1986 and 1996 increased by about a third. People who were in charge of satellites and created the original graph (the world's top astrophysicists Doug Hoyt, Richard C. Willson), protested in vain against manipulation. http://climatechange.thinkaboutit.eu/think4/post/judithgate_ipcc_consensus_was_only_one_solar_physicist

It is the Sun. http://www.rocketscientistsjournal.com/

Your missinformation site can't tell us why the oceans are cooling and why its not been warming for over 16 years. AGW was refuted after 15 years. According to the NOAA State of the Climate 2008 report, climate computer model simulations show that if observations find that the globe has not warmed for periods of 15 years or more, the climate models predicting man-made warming from CO2 will be falsified at a confidence level of 95% http://theclimatescepticsparty.blogspot.com/2011/04/agw-falsified-hypothesis.html
Royal Weddings and Climate Change

Royal Weddings and Climate Change

Commented May 2, 2011 at 19:28:19 in Green

“That is true, however the contributions man has made are the basis for claims of unusual warming. The data clearly shows there is nothing unusual about the amount or rate of recent warming, compared to the rest of the recorded time period.”

ThinkCreeps on May 3, 2011 at 03:44:18

“The visual argument that post makes is negated by plotting the relevant thing.”
Royal Weddings and Climate Change

Royal Weddings and Climate Change

Commented May 1, 2011 at 15:48:57 in Green

“While the testing might have coincided with testing the warming and cooling trend has remained steady since the little ice age in both warming rate and timing. It has warmed about .5C per century since little ice age in an up and down 30 year sine wave pattern.

Compare the 1880-1946 cycle with the 1942-2008 cycle if Fig 3. Recurrent Cycles. http://www.appinsys.com/GlobalWarming/GW_Summary.htm

Neither the rate of change or the amount of change is different from the "Natural" warming phase and the "Co2 Caused Warming" phase. The underlying warming trend since the LIA is also unchanged.

While interesting to look for a bomb testing influence in the data i'm not sure it made a noticable difference in the observed trends.”
Royal Weddings and Climate Change

Royal Weddings and Climate Change

Commented Apr 30, 2011 at 20:37:14 in Green

“Specious? Is it inaccurate?

When Co2 accumulation began to Accelerate after 1942 global cooling set in for 30 years leading some of the same warmists to predict a coming ice age. The rate of warming has remained the same since the little ice age. There is no evidence of Co2 driving climate. http://fgservices1947.wordpress.com/2009/08/30/anthropogenic-global-warming-hypothesis-falsified/ Note that according to NOAA's 2008 State of the Climate Report AGW is falsified to a margin of 95% if there is no warming for a 15 years or more. It's been 16 years 4 months. http://theclimatescepticsparty.blogspot.com/2011/04/agw-falsified-hypothesis.html "According to Phil Jones, there has been no statistically significant warming since 1995 [16 years, 3 months ago]. Ergo, the climate models have already been falsified at the 95% confidence level and it's time to revert to the null hypothesis that man made CO2 is not causing global warming."

AGW theory rests upon a water vapor feedback that was refuted by empirical measurements in the 90s. http://berfofanation.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474979205593 http://c3headlines.typepad.com/.a/6a010536b58035970c0147e2fc6895970b-pi

There are however good correlations with Solar forcing .
http://www.osti.gov/energycitations/product.biblio.jsp?osti_id=4097463

http://www.fel.duke.edu/~scafetta/pdf/2006GL027142.pdf

http://www.springerlink.com/content/q1740143246t005l/

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1998GeoRL..25.1035C


http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2005.../2005GL023429.shtml”
Royal Weddings and Climate Change

Royal Weddings and Climate Change

Commented Apr 30, 2011 at 12:28:41 in Green

“Man's Co2 only really began to increase around 1942. And it cooled from 1940 to 1970.”

normkr on May 1, 2011 at 13:58:38

“After a lull around the beginning of the Depression, coinciding with the temperature anomaly of 1931-32, sulphur emissions rose until the Clean Air Act of 1970. Accidental geoengineering?”

Jim Milks on May 1, 2011 at 13:05:36

“Don't forget the cooling effects of above-ground nuclear tests during that time frame. It's quite interesting that the warming trend resumed after nuclear tests went below ground.”

ixington on Apr 30, 2011 at 16:39:16

“This is a specious argument. The climate is a very complex system with many sinks, sources, and effects.

About 100 PPM of anthropogenic CO2 was produced between 1800 and 1935, of which roughly half were produced in the period between 1910 and 1925.

One might ask, why is it that we saw so little increase in CO2 for the first half of the industrial revolution? Well, one piece of the answer might be due to the fact that there are various equilibrium processes sequestering CO2, such as exchange with the ocean. As CO2 concentrations increase in the ocean, it becomes harder and harder for CO2 to dissolve, resulting in a delayed and seemingly sudden rise in atmospheric CO2.”
Royal Weddings and Climate Change

Royal Weddings and Climate Change

Javani on May 2, 2011 at 22:51:19

“Same data? Sure? These people are not showing at HPost the single central England record going back 350 years. They compiled a "Central England" "Series" Look carefully, "series." That means they are smearing the single old record with other ones.

This plays on the idea people know about this old record. The graph above as far as it is meant to be inferred as the famous central England old single station is a trick. Like trying to get rid of the MWP.”

ThinkCreeps on May 2, 2011 at 18:18:02

“You may want to read the right-hand y-axis: `CO2 emissions' is rather different from `CO2 level'.”
Climate Change: Doing Nothing Will Cost More Than Preventative Measures, New Report Shows

Climate Change: Doing Nothing Will Cost More Than Preventative Measures, New Report Shows

Commented Apr 29, 2011 at 15:16:08 in Green

“Warming has continued at roughly the same rate since the Little Ice age. Fig. 2b shows the Linerar trend with the multi-decadal oscillation. http://people.iarc.uaf.edu/~sakasofu/pdf/two_natural_components_recent_climate_change.pdf

The rate of warming has remained the same since roughly 1800, with the up an down sine wave pattern holding. This pattern is a more accurate at predicting climate that the GCMs have been.


Remember when Man made Co2 relly took off in 1940's temperatures dropped for 30 years. Twice the time needed to refute AGW. Now we are at the crest of the next wave with 16 years of cooling under the belt.

It's do or die time for AGW Theory. If cooling continues as the natural trend suggests AGW is false. If it keeps warming as the IPCC predicts then they have a case for Co2.

So far there is no proof the trend is not natural.”
Climate Change: Doing Nothing Will Cost More Than Preventative Measures, New Report Shows

Climate Change: Doing Nothing Will Cost More Than Preventative Measures, New Report Shows

Commented Apr 29, 2011 at 12:23:02 in Green

“Still no evidence of a troposheric hot spot or an explanation for the recent 16 year cooling trend. The cooling trend that refutes AGW by the way. The cooling oceans?

If Co2 "Blocks" infra red as you claim why is there no Hot Spot?

Why are observed temperatures so well correlated to TSI and not to Co2 increasing levels?”

absolument on May 4, 2011 at 23:57:22

“Why exactly do you expect a tropospheric hot spot? And can you quantify the statistical significance, if any, of that "16 year cooling trend?" Do you know how to calculate statistical significance?”

amirlach on May 4, 2011 at 21:10:44

“Recent Peer review papers on the solar earth climate connection.
Long-term solar activity as a controlling factor for global warming in the 20th century, Geomagnetism and Aeronomy, Volume 49, Number 8, pp. 1271-1274, December 2009) - V. A. Dergachev, O. M. Raspopov

A solar pattern in the longest temperature series from three stations in Europe (Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics, Volume 72, Issue 1, pp. 62-76, January 2010) - Jean-Louis Le Mouel, Vladimir Kossobokov, Vincent Courtillot

Solar Minima, Earth’s rotation and Little Ice Ages in the past and in the future: The North Atlantic�European case (Global and Planetary Change, January 2010) - Nils-Axel Morner

Solar activity and climatic variability in the time interval from 10 to 250 Ma ago (Geomagnetism and Aeronomy, Volume 50, Number 2, pp. 141-152, April 2010) - O. M. Raspopov et al.

A statistically significant signature of multi-decadal solar activity changes in atmospheric temperatures at three European stations (Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics, Volume 72, Issues 7-8, pp. 595-606, May 2010) - Vladimir Kossobokov, Jean-Louis Le Mouel and Vincent Courtillot”

amirlach on May 4, 2011 at 21:09:19

http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2010/06/more-on-solar-controversy.html

"The claim of the IPCC, that human influence is much greater than natural changes, will be by the numbers not supported and must be considered incorrect. This is supported by the last graph, which shows a clear correlation between total solar radiation and sunspots.

Consequently, the scientists in charge of the ACRIM missions (http://www.acrim.com/) come to the following statement:
"The Earth's weather and climate regime is determined By The total solar irradiance (TSI) and its interactions with the Earth's atmosphere, oceans and land masses. TSI proxies during the past 400 years and the records of surface temperature show that TSI variation has been the dominant forcing for climate change during the industrial era. ".
Dr. rer.nat. B. Huettner (physicist) for EIKE"”

Robco1 on May 2, 2011 at 20:30:34

“So why are so many people making up these silly talking points and posting them all over the internet?

The fossil fuel lobby is using the PR tools created for big tobacco to confuse the public and delay action, so that they can eek out a few more years profiteering at the public expense. For example, here is how Exxon enacted the API memo recommendations from 1998: http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science_and_impacts/global_warming_contrarians/exxonmobil-report-smoke.html

Robco1 on May 2, 2011 at 20:17:22

“"It's the sun!" Wow, I thought this denier talking point had been retired...

...because it has been debunked so often it strains credibility.

Lockwood 2008: "The conclusions of our previous paper, that solar forcing has declined over the past 20 years while surface air temperatures have continued to rise, are shown to apply for the full range of potential time constants for the climate response to the variations in the solar forcings."

Erlykin 2009: "We deduce that the maximum recent increase in the mean surface temperature of the Earth which can be ascribed to solar activity is 14% of the observed global warming."

Ammann 2007: "Although solar and volcanic effects appear to dominate most of the slow climate variations within the past thousand years, the impacts of greenhouse gases have dominated since the second half of the last century."

http://www.skepticalscience.com/solar-activity-sunspots-global-warming-intermediate.htm
next
1 - 25