Discussion in 'Environment' started by longknife, Dec 16, 2012.
- Dr. Klaus L.E. Kaiser
Read the full piece @ It’s the Sun, after all
Impossible. We've been told for years that the two nonillion kilograms of superhot fusing hydrogen nuclei in the neighborhood has nothing to do with climate.
Um ... sure Dave. Whatever your voices tell you. But seriously, you don't have to share.
Now, let's act like a rational AGW scientist instead, and look at more of the quote, a little beyond the cherry-picked snippet.
"Many empirical relationships have been reported between GCR [galactic cosmic rays] or cosmogenic isotope archives and some aspects of the climate system...The forcing from changes in total solar irradiance alone does not seem to account for these observations, implying the existence of an amplifying mechanism such as the hypothesized GCR-cloud link."
It's just describing the theories of some other scientists (Svensmark), not saying those theories are true. Then it goes on to point out how the data doesn't support those theories. There's nothing there stating "the sun did it", being that the data contradicts such a conclusion.
Naturally, the whole denialist retardosphere is currently abuzz with this. They were told to parrot this amazing game changer that proves those dirty liberals were wrong all along, and so they all parrot.
Congratulations, your instinct seems to be in working order even though your intellect has been completely bamboozled. It does sound beyond stupid for someone to claim that the sun has no real effect on climate doesn't it? But the truth is, mamooth, that climate science is, and has in fact claimed that the sun has little effect on the changing climate.
Sun's Variations Have Little Effect on Global Warming | LiveScience
Sun's Impact on Climate Change Overestimated?
There are literally dozens of articles, and references (many pal reviewed) stating without doubt that the sun has little to do with climate change.
It is pretty obvious that you haven't done much research into the topic, and instead fall on the side of warmists due to some personal reason. You seem to be unaware that climate science claims that the atmosphere delivers more than twice as much energy to the surface of the earth than the sun does.
the sun's activity was very high during the last 50 years of the last century. because the rate wasnt changing the 'consensus' scientists decided that it couldnt be the cause of warming. that is like saying you need to keep turning up the gas under a pot of water to make it boil, that a constant high heat wouldnt work.
the problem with dismissing these types of variables is that the remaining variables are given exaggerated weight, like CO2.
The voices of the AGW cult told us this. Don't be stupid, unless, as I suspect, you simply can't help it.
Is this based on the model? You know, the models that are never changed as new data comes it -- the data is changed to fit the model, instead?
There's nothing rational about AGW "Science"
The theory failed and that's even after alters and destroying the data they don't like
Yes, Virginia, that Big Yellow Thing in the Shy affects our climate and refuses to believe that CO2 drive climate on Earth; it is the ultimate Denier!
"Little effect on changing climate" and "no real effect on climate" are two entirely different things. The first is quite correct, backed up by the facts, and thus held by all informed and intelligent people. The second is a dumb strawman that denialist political cultists insist on trotting out whenever they can.
Which, again, is entirely correct, and entirely different from yours and Dave's "you always say the sun has nothing to do with climate!" strawman.
It's not a difficult concept, the difference in those statements. You only fail to understand because you want to fail to understand. You'd be cast out of your political cult if you failed to mouth the cult dogma, and as denialists tend to be herdbeasts, being cast out would be like a death sentence. Hence, your fear of banishment drives you into willfully misunderstanding even the most simple logic.
while you are technically correct that the Sun has (an incredibly small) impact on the climate models, I dont believe that " Dave's "you always say the sun has nothing to do with climate!" strawman" is a strawman at all.
there are a lot of papers out there that show correlations of between .4-.7 with the sun's activity (not just TSI) over the last few hundreds to thousands of years.
I believe Rawls calls this ignoring of solar factors 'the omitted variable fraud'. if the IPCC report was a business statement someone would go to jail.
Separate names with a comma.