quote:
Originally posted by CobblyWorlds:
TT2,
Those claiming a solar role for the recent warming (~0.6degC in the last 30 years) lost the argument years ago.
Yeah! In the same way those who said the world was flat also were proven to be wrong - so will those who say the sun has nothing to do with it.
Back to reality though science even if inconvenient to the pro-AGW has not finished exploring the possibility that the Sun has more to do with GW than CO2.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/08/070801174450.htm quote:
Originally posted by CobblyWorlds:
1) Stratospheric cooling - would be expected with an enhanced greenhouse effect. Stratospheric warming - would be expected with an increase in solar irradiance. The Stratosphere is observed to be cooling - CFCs are only part of the reason.
And this can only possibly be true if the fundamental principals of thermodynamics are utterly and totally ignored.
quote:
Originally posted by CobblyWorlds:
2) Diurnal Range - the difference between maximum day and minimum night temperatures. The behaviour of this suggests a radiative cause (yet solar irradiance has not increased during the recent warming). And diurnal range behaviour can be explained in terms of CO2 increases and sulphate aerosol changes. It can't be explained by solar effects. (Due to trapping of infra-red the enhanced greenhouse effect is predicted to cause a greater night time warming than during the day - hence a reduction in diurnal trend as observed).
The question is not whether or not global warming is happening the question disputed is whether it is natural or man made. Arrogance suggests man made.
quote:
Originally posted by CobblyWorlds:
3) Globally, ground insolation is only at around the levels recorded in the 1960s, yet global average temperature has gone up by almost 0.6degC over that period.
These measurements were generally taken from areas affected through the heat island effect or from data that has been manipulated or selectively used to provide the politically correct science needed to support politically correct AGW theories.
quote:
Originally posted by CobblyWorlds:
4) Direct observation of Total Solar Irradiance (PMOD dataset) which correlates well (~70%) with Wentzler's Kitt Peak Magnetograms shows no solar irradiance trend over the last 30 years. Observation of neutron counts shows no trend in cosmic ray flux that could explain the global warming or the global cloud cover changes of the last 30 years.
Cooling?
Given that the ~0.6degC warming of the last 30 years has happened without an increase in solar irradiance, and that the warming prior to that was nowhere near as that (even with the increase of ~2W/m^2 in solar irradiance over the first part of the 20th century).
And given that sunspot numbers peaked at about >200 in the 1950s, around 1900 they were peaking about 100, and there was a 0.2degC rise of global average temperature over that period. Then even a Maunder Minimum type event doesn't seem likely to be able to more than temper the warming trend.
So it doesn't seem that the predictions of a cooling around 2020 are likely to amount to much in terms of impact on global average temperature.
Some scientists? Would that be about 3? Landscheidt, Patterson, and Abussamatov (I think that's his name). I can't find others officially claiming the 2020 minima of the Schwabe cycle will cause cooling. NASA don't event seem interested in offering an opinion on a cooling, although they have modelled the Schwabe cycle minima.
In short we'll see, but I am not betting on a cooling, and with atmospheric persistence of CO2 measured in centuries for our current emissions, such a cooling would be a blip.
I am betting on a cooling the odds are good, unless we are talking of a mass extinction event (and we are not although many pro-AGW would like you to believe this is the case) the planets climate is not likely to spiral out of control in an ever increasing rise in temperature - no not without supporting scientific evidence.
