A NASA study reported by Daily Tech has come to an "amazing" conclusion that is sure to cause depression among Al Gore and much of the mainstream media: the sun heats the earth. Yes, as astounding as that sounds, the NASA study has found that solar activity is the real culprit of any global warming. Sorry, Heidi Cullen. Here are some of the details of the NASA study:
Report indicates solar cycle has been impacting Earth since the Industrial Revolution
Some researchers believe that the solar cycle influences global climate changes. They attribute recent warming trends to cyclic variation. Skeptics, though, argue that there's little hard evidence of a solar hand in recent climate changes.
May we now call those skeptics "solar warming deniers?"
Now, a new research report from a surprising source may help to lay this skepticism to rest. A study from NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland looking at climate data over the past century has concluded that solar variation has made a significant impact on the Earth's climate. The report concludes that evidence for climate changes based on solar radiation can be traced back as far as the Industrial Revolution.
Hmm... So the more solar radiation the warmer the earth. Your humble correspondent needs to take some time to absorb this amazing concept.
Past research has shown that the sun goes through eleven year cycles. At the cycle's peak, solar activity occurring near sunspots is particularly intense, basking the Earth in solar heat. According to Robert Cahalan, a climatologist at the Goddard Space Flight Center, "Right now, we are in between major ice ages, in a period that has been called the Holocene."
Which means we will ultimately be facing Global Cooling.
Thomas Woods, solar scientist at the University of Colorado in Boulder concludes, "The fluctuations in the solar cycle impacts Earth's global temperature by about 0.1 degree Celsius, slightly hotter during solar maximum and cooler during solar minimum. The sun is currently at its minimum, and the next solar maximum is expected in 2012."
According to the study, during periods of solar quiet, 1,361 watts per square meter of solar energy reaches Earth's outermost atmosphere. Periods of more intense activity brought 1.3 watts per square meter (0.1 percent) more energy.
While the NASA study acknowledged the sun's influence on warming and cooling patterns, it then went badly off the tracks. Ignoring its own evidence, it returned to an argument that man had replaced the sun as the cause current warming patterns. Like many studies, this conclusion was based less on hard data and more on questionable correlations and inaccurate modeling techniques.
Also based on wishful thinking. Paging Al Gore!
The inconvertible fact, here is that even NASA's own study acknowledges that solar variation has caused climate change in the past. And even the study's members, mostly ardent supports of AGW theory, acknowledge that the sun may play a significant role in future climate changes.
I'll believe that acknowledgment when I see this report featured on the Huffington Post Green News page which chonicles every tiny aspect of the environment...except the most obvious about the sun heating the earth.
—P.J. Gladnick is a freelance writer and creator of the DUmmie FUnnies blog.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Well, duh! "Beauty is
June 5, 2009 - 07:41 ET by HockeyKidWell, duh!
"Beauty is only skin deep, but liberal's to the bone." - me
CARBON FOOTPRINT!
June 5, 2009 - 07:46 ET by John WIDoes anyone know what the carbon footprint of all of the active volcanoes, and sulphur springs are???
And does anyone know, as to all of the underwater vents, that spew out enough heat to melt lead, how much it is having an adverse effect of on the oceans???
:-)
Now we know the real reason algore travels to NKorea..
June 5, 2009 - 07:56 ET by upcountrywaterI'll go I'll go
"The North Koreans would respect someone of his stature, and his stake in the issue would make his mission eminently credible," he added.
Good luck with that, ya "solar warming denier!"
great line BTW...
Reagan VS Carter and 0bama
Solar Warming Deniers
June 5, 2009 - 09:30 ET by P.J. GladnickPerhaps I need to register a trademark on "Solar Warming Deniers." I just did a search on the web and your humble correspondent is the FIRST to use that phrase.
Dang, this put's a big hole
June 5, 2009 - 08:04 ET by Hunter12Dang, this put's a big hole in Al's Mayan SUV's led to the demise of the Mayan culture theory.
"An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last." - Sir Winston Churchill
Mr. Hansen, paging Mr. Hansen...
June 5, 2009 - 08:05 ET by Jarhead68I think the first comment, "Well, DUH!", sums it up very well. I second the DUH and raise you two DUH's.
I guess they bypassed James Hansen on this one. Hasn't he been fired yet?
lol
June 5, 2009 - 10:32 ET by DontFeedTheTrollsI'll see your raise and raise it a SHEESH!
D
Keep the ILLEGALS out, join NumbersUSA to send free faxes to your reps.
False data
June 5, 2009 - 08:11 ET by BKeyserLook, this article has to be more junk science 'cause I saw someone in the comments section of Daily Tech link to the REAL data on Wikipedia. /sarc off
If nutjobs like this guy knew what it will really cost he/she and his/her family if big Al's Manbearpig is actually acknowledged in the form of cap-n-trade by the idiots in Congress, he/she would grow up and dispel the fantasy in a heartbeat.
This one is enough for me
June 5, 2009 - 08:14 ET by Seftonhttp://199.6.131.12/...
Chart showing data from Antarctica ice cores, showing the cycles of the earth's warming and cooling (ice ages) for the last 425,000 years.
Another hoax
June 5, 2009 - 08:15 ET by ThisnThatI don't believe this a bit. The sun can't possibly be a factor in warming or cooling the earth. I've read all the articles; I've followed the research; I've listened diligently to the one-sided arguments of the left; and I've blocked out all reason and logic. My conclusion? Only mankinds breathing; our farm animals flatuance; and our dirty, evil SUVs affect temperatures on earth!
Don't believe me? Well, then answer this, will ya? In the morning, we all get up and increase our activity, and drive our SUVs to work. And what happens? The daily temperature increases. Then, at night, we all go to sleep, decrease our activities, and park our SUVs. And what happens? The nighttime temperature decreases.
What other proof do we need? This NASA report is meant to lull us to sleep, and to ignore the dangers associated with mankind's existance. Don't buy it, NBers, not for a moment. Join me -- DENY THAT REPORT.
___________________________________
Liberals constantly demand that we accept a glaring falsehood as truth; Obama's elimination of the word "terror" will make terrorist acts less terrifying
This...
June 5, 2009 - 08:33 ET by Mike Sargent...is BRILLIANT. You wouldn't happen to have a blog of your own, would you?
Can you explain why in
June 5, 2009 - 10:20 ET by T-Bone MassCan you explain why in winter when it is cold the sun goes down around 5:0pm and in the summer it goes down after 8:00 pm?
Global warming has something to do with it.
Also it was 12 degrees in January and now it is around 75 degrees, how come i can't go skiing this weekend, where is all the snow?
Can you explain why in
June 5, 2009 - 14:57 ET by Dan The Man 2Can you explain why in winter when it is cold the sun goes down around 5:0pm and in the summer it goes down after 8:00 pm?
Well Duh. The sun doesnt like to be out when its colder so he comes out in the daytime. Anyone knows this fact its common sense.
I believe "DUH" is the correct comment.
June 5, 2009 - 08:43 ET by jazboTremendous comment , "Another Hoax" :-)
Ya think maybe the Kimchees will keep Al if we ask really nice?
Those who believe in nothing will believe anything.
Somebody should find out
June 5, 2009 - 08:43 ET by taterSomebody should find out how the Vikings in Greenland way back when felt about sunspot activity. I'd say they'd prefer the maximas.
www.theholyrosary.org
"There is no problem, I tell you, no matter how difficult it is, that we can not resolve by the prayer of the Holy Rosary." -Sister Lucia
To borrow from my friends
June 5, 2009 - 08:45 ET by TASS71To borrow from my friends at HotAir.com:
And the Captain Louis Renault award goes to ....wait for it....NASA!!!
I'm shocked, shocked I tell you, that an organization like NASA which produced the monumental stupidity that is James Hansen can finally come up with the truth...
However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results. - Sir Winston Churchill
Call your congresscritter
June 5, 2009 - 08:47 ET by KJ_sezCall your congresscritter immediately! Tell him/her/it that cap & trade legslation should never be passed without putting caps on the use of solar energy, or a direct tax on the sun itself! Why, anything less would be completely meaningless! We must get the sun to control its emissions - doesn't it know the harm it's doing to the planet?!!??!?
I have just finished a study--and--
June 5, 2009 - 08:52 ET by misterbillI have just finished a study--and-- it has been discovered that the use of dinosaurs at the stone quarry in Bedrock had a powerful effect on global temperatures and climates. This was caused by excessive methane passed by these large, gentle creatures. Recently discovered stone tablets reflect the concerns of a Mr Slate and a Barney Rubble that the continued excavation at the quarry was resulting in the retention of the rays of that big round hot thing in the sky.
Many citizens of bedrock, per this new found data, had serious doubts about the problem with the gas in the air. However, a retired politician , Helpme Algorus, contended that the dinosaurs were responsible. He was supported in his belief by Phil Handson, the man in charge of training pterodactyls to carry humans in flight to various locations.
The leader of Bedrock's country, Barely Able, who had a surprising victory in the elections, largely, it was suspected, due to large numbers of votes from cavemen from other parts of the world who snuck in and voted for him, backed Algorus theories and imposed restrictions on, not only Bedrock, but all other quarries.
In summary, the stone tablets show that the owner of the stone quarry and other locations were ordered to decrease the emissions of the dinosaurs or pay a fee to continue to use them. This then resulted in a Fred Flintstone and the aforesaid Barney Rubble , losing their ability to provide sustenance for them and their families since Mr Slate said that no on could buy his rock at the higher prices.
The last stone tablets indicate that the Algorus theory was wrong and the hot round thing in the sky was the source of the heat and perspiration. Last ditch attempts to save their world by training the pterodactyls to fly up and crash into the round thing to turn the heat off met with failure as the birds would burst into flames long before they got to the source of the heat.
Apparently, from stone tablets found elsewhere, a number of people survived by heading up to where the round thing did not light everything up so many hours a day and there was ice and snow.
Algorus was one of the survivors. We have not finished interpreting the tablets, but apparently Algorus noticed that a lot of white furred animals were dying off. He attributed that to the same gasses being emitted by yak herds that were raised for food when the people moved to the cooler areas.
We are not done yet interpreting the outcome of his next efforts and will post the results when we finish..
In a cruder variation of "Well, duh"
June 5, 2009 - 08:56 ET by IgnatzJFahrquarNo sh!t Sherlock.
This article from over two years ago makes it pretty apparent.
Yes, I know, the website is not reputable, but they try. <sarc off>
I guess those rovers spit out a lot of CO2.
"You should always tell the truth, because if you tell the truth you make it the other person's problem." Sean Connery
Mars is catching CO2 down wind from us
June 5, 2009 - 09:25 ET by sevenhttp://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070228-mars-warming.html
Mars Melt Hints at Solar, Not Human, Cause for Warming, Scientist Says
Kate Ravilious
for National Geographic News
February 28, 2007
Simultaneous warming on Earth and Mars suggests that our planet's recent climate changes have a natural—and not a human-induced—cause, according to one scientist's controversial theory.
Earth is currently experiencing rapid warming, which the vast majority of climate scientists says is due to humans pumping huge amounts of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. (Get an overview: "Global Warming Fast Facts".)
Of course national geopgraphic pics are not scientific but pictures taken by cameras that show less ice in the artic are used as sciantific proof.
This is the same emotional bullying we read about thousands of years ago by astrologists. The physical consequences of challenging a reader of the stars and planets were violent.
The earth loses heat by radiating heat
June 5, 2009 - 08:59 ET by sevenExclusive: New NSIDC director Serreze explains the “death spiral” of Arctic ice and the “breathaking ignorance” of blogs like WattsUpWithThat
100 years ago a physicist did an experiment that easily demonstrated when heat increases, heat loss by radiation heat increased. Most weather models claim cloud coverage is a constant and ignore other varriable to help their charts look like their predictions/warnings.
Los Angeles has two strange
June 5, 2009 - 09:04 ET by nolotrippenLos Angeles has two strange months that have very cool mornings that warm into hot afternoons. We call them May Grey and June Gloom.
Strangely, the "hot" afternoons haven't been getting past the warm stage. The weather's been beautiful, not even getting warmish until around 3 pm.
The Envriomeanies would say that this, too, is a sign of global warming (along with poor dental care and kitten fur).
You mean our two local news meteorologists are...
June 5, 2009 - 09:26 ET by Ole_SargeCORRECT????
Locally in the Baltimore Region, two local TV Meteorologists have been backing the "Solar Heating" theory publicly on their radio show and in the news papers. One is a professor at a local university as well. The Weather Channel's "Dr. Cullen" has tried to discredit and decertify these two (on competing local stations) for a couple years now.
Remember folks...
June 5, 2009 - 09:33 ET by Prester John....we (or at least most of us) are paying for this stuff with our tax dollars.
Taxation and power grabs
June 5, 2009 - 09:40 ET by sevenhttp://www.dailytech.com/NASA+Study+Acknowledges+Solar+Cycle+Not+Man+Responsible+for+Past+Warming/article15310.htm
NASA now tell us it is solar. No wonder the extremists have such urgency.. their biggist fears is some congressmen will start seeing sone science that tells us the sun is still hot and sunshine warms this planet.
Bad salesmen use urgency. The fear os losing the sale is gone after they close the deal.
Tax now will cool us off how fast?
It will cool off the economy.
Fire suppression
June 5, 2009 - 09:42 ET by ScadsobeesOh please. Not more denialist stuff.
What do they put in fire suppression units? That is right, carbon dioxide! ALL THAT CO2 THAT WE ARE PRODUCING IS PUTTING THE SUN OUT!!! We have to get crap-and-trade in place before we all freeze!
Good stuff
June 5, 2009 - 18:51 ET by jazz_fanIf the sun did dim I'm sure they'd try to find a way to blame us for it. I still don't see how they explain away the fact that CO2 was 12 times higher in the past - during an ice age. I doubt there's enough fossil fuel to get us to that level again but even if we did, the ice age will still resume whenever it's ready.
"Report indicates solar
June 5, 2009 - 09:58 ET by marvl"Report indicates solar cycle has been impacting Earth since the Industrial Revolution"
Who are the morons who write this stuff? I think the solar cycle started impacting earth a little before the Industrial Revolution. Or maybe they think the solar cycle was caused by the Industrial Revolution? Ooh, ooh, I know; Al Gore invented the solar cycle and the Industrial Revolution.
Frickin' idiots.
You don't say! The Rocky
June 5, 2009 - 10:33 ET by wiwfYou don't say!
The Rocky Mountain Collegian: Illustrating Idiocy
I saw that too...
June 5, 2009 - 10:52 ET by Seftonand thought "huh?"
The solar cycle has been around and "impacting" the Earth long before whacko environmentalists soiled the planet.
Since the industrial revolution?
June 5, 2009 - 10:41 ET by JackrvReport indicates solar cycle has been impacting Earth since the Industrial Revolution
What the heck was the sun doing before that?
Jack Van Nostrand
Obviously the tax and trade issue is huge today.
June 5, 2009 - 11:01 ET by sevenObama is eliminating lobbyists tomorrow. 800 more lobbyists have registered to lobby on green and make green doing it.
PJ, while I applaud your
June 5, 2009 - 16:28 ET by NL207PJ, while I applaud your address of this issue, you need to red your supporting materials more carefully and be very precise about what you quote from them. You are linking DailyTech. Their article is not the original science. DailyTech is linking a reference on ScienceDaily, which is also an article about the original sccience but is not the orginal itself. The ScienceDaily story is an adaption of an article written by Rani Gran, also not the original science. We must assume a combination of Gran and the ScienceDaily staff are responsible for this content. They do not report their references, which I find deplorable, but I can infer what some of them are from the scientists quoted in their article. This is likely one of the original science papers: http://www.springerlink.com/content/p0825706v3815t46/ There are at least two others as the three authors mentioned do not often co-author papers. Cahalan is not even corresponding author on the SORCE project.
The report you are indirectly referencing is still very pro AGW. Its author(s) conclude that recent warming is predominantly anthropogenic and ascribe no more than .15 degree C of recent [since 1900] warming to solar variation. The total warming is measured at 0.6 degree C over that interval. Nowhere in their report do they claim that the sun has caused 1.0 degree C warming in the last century.
What they do say: Solar variation has caused variations in climate of 1.0 C since the 17th century. However, if you examine the underlying data, you will see that this is an understatement of the real facts. There is a chart of a Be10 isotope proxy for solar output associated with these articles. It suggests there has been all of 1.0 degree C or even more warming since the depths of the Maunder Minimum AND it demonstrates a very close coupling between solar activity and climate along with a noticeable increase in solar output concurrent with the warming of the 20th century.
Very informative...but
June 5, 2009 - 19:01 ET by jazz_fanYou're right. The media and even some science magazines don't rigorously footnote and credit sources. Then again, that's not their job, it's the job of scientific publications that scientists strive to publish in.
Your point is taken that they credit .15C warming to solar variance. But when you take into account the land use changes wrought by agriculture and such, the impact of CO2 must be seen as small. And if you consider that they began measuring this warming from the end of the Little Ice Age it isn't too surprising that it has warmed since then. It was called the LIA because it was cold and after a cold period you can usually expect warming. But most of the impact of CO2 comes with the first few parts per million. At this point the narrow bands of IR that can interact with CO2 have already been fully 'saturated'. It's not the proper term but it does make the facts easily understood. More CO2 has less effect than ever, each successive molecule has less impact on temperature than the one before it did.
Here, let me help you a bit
June 7, 2009 - 21:58 ET by NL207Here, let me help you a bit before you put your foot in something. My academic training includes a degree in physics. One of my degrees is a Phd, which is in hard sciences.
The diminishing marginal effect of increasing atmospheric CO2 concentration you are referring to is a theoretical consequence of the Beer-Lambert Law.
There is another effect you do not mention: Lorentz Spreading. Look it up. It, too, is inconsequential in this case.
The arguments of the AGW crowd are not based upon these phenomena. If they were, the debate would already be over. The Alarmists base their predictions of calamity on unproven theories of net positive feedbacks to CO2 induced warming. I think there is substantial qualitative evidence suggesting they are mostly wrong on this point. The only thing I am not comfortable about is our basic lack of knowledge about the time constant of polar ice melting and sea level rise / fall in response to temperature changes. There are estimates about that it takes as much as 1700 years to fully realize a sea level change in response to an incremental mean surface temperature change. That is disconcerting. Human history changes at far greater velocity.
"Report indicates solar
June 5, 2009 - 18:39 ET by deerjerkydave"Report indicates solar cycle has been impacting Earth since the Industrial Revolution"
I guess this study is another example of my tax dollars at work.
Solar cycles...well no
June 6, 2009 - 00:36 ET by RR GOPSolar cycles...well no $hit.
I am only beginning to realize the extent to which the natural sciences have been infiltrated by Liberals. I have long taken it for granted that that was the case with the social sciences as that requires less real scientific analysis and can therefore be floated by knee-jerk emotionalism and ideology.
Thinking that maybe that within the natural sciences, environmental science was the most infiltrated. Still a pretty lightweight science and one that lazy Leftist ideologues could handle without too much trouble. There does not seem to be any dearth of environmental PhDs willing to suck up to any scam that knocks capitalism, industry and technology.
One of the 34% who thinks George W. Bush was a great President. One of the 61% who wants to bring back the stock and pillory (yep...approval for Congress now at 39%...do you believe that!?).