Climate change is not caused by solar output

[gingerjedi]

"All the graphs they showed stopped in about 1980, and I knew why, because things diverged after that," he told the BBC News website.

Oh right so the big nuclear ball that has been bellowing out heat for millions of years has changed slightly since the 1980's??? I'd say more of a natural blip than a complete change in solar activity.

I am not a scientist but I can feel the sun on my face... sometimes!

[Mailman]

But the other studies don't say something else. Read through both those reports and they basically say the same thing - there is no link between solar output and long term climate change. The only people that are saying otherwise are routinely discredited. They are maverick nutcases, but they are the ones people believe, or at least accept as "the alternative point-of-view".

The "the sun aint the cause" crowd did side step that geezer who does the "sun-cloud-hotness" thingy though...which is where I thought this whole debate really started anyway.

Mailman

[dang65]

The "the sun aint the cause" crowd did side step that geezer who does the "sun-cloud-hotness" thingy though...

Sorry, you've lost me there. What do you mean by "side step"? And the rest of your post for that matter.

[Mailman]

Im talking about this;

But the organisation was criticised in some quarters for not taking into account the cosmic ray hypothesis, developed by, among others, Henrik Svensmark and Eigil Friis-Christensen of the Danish National Space Center.

Mailman

[dang65]

Yeah, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change were originally criticised after their report in February. This new report deals with that original criticism and shows it to be unfounded. That's what the fuss is about.

The article ends with the note, "Drs Svensmark and Friis-Christensen could not be reached for comment."

[Ardesco]

The article ends with the note, "Drs Svensmark and Friis-Christensen could not be reached for comment."

Convenient....

[shaunbhoy]

Wise up dang65. The ginormous ball of glowing gases 93 million miles away has, and always will, be responsible for most of the climate variables on our planet, and not a few farting cows and some internal combustion motor vehicles. The fact that other planets in our solar system are concurrently having warming phases also supports this, you just have to start thinking out of the box mate and not taking at face value all the contradictory nonsense that emanates from scores of beardy weirdys with a vested interest in prolonging the funding for their "research" (aka job for life)!

[Old Greg]

Wise up dang65. The ginormous ball of glowing gases 93 million miles away has, and always will, be responsible for most of the climate variables on our planet, and not a few farting cows and some internal combustion motor vehicles. The fact that other planets in our solar system are concurrently having warming phases also supports this, you just have to start thinking out of the box mate and not taking at face value all the contradictory nonsense that emanates from scores of beardy weirdys with a vested interest in prolonging the funding for their "research" (aka job for life)!

Of course! Thinking out of the box! I must try that next time I'm faced with overwhelming (but inconvenient) scientific evidence.

[shaunbhoy]

Of course! Thinking out of the box! I must try that next time I'm faced with overwhelming (but inconvenient) scientific evidence.

Do that. It is very enlightening. I expect that it was all the rage back in the days when the overwhelming scientific evidence "proved" the world was flat.

[The Lone Gunman]

Of course! Thinking out of the box! I must try that next time I'm faced with overwhelming (but inconvenient) scientific evidence.

This overwhelming scientific evidence still can not explain the Vostock ice cores or the associated CO2 levels though can it.

Considering mans CO2 output has been on a steady increase since he first discovered fire there should be a clear and constant climb in Global temperatures should there not?

I am still concerned at the nature of the investigation.