New paper shows global warming since 1950 was due to the Sun
|
June 13 2011
From Dr. David Stockwell's blog, Niche Modeling, comes word that he has submitted a paper for publication showing that solar activity alone explains the observed global warming since 1950, without need to implicate 'greenhouse gases'.
Solar variability does explain late-20th-century warming
Finally, my hibernation of the last 6 months is coming to an end, with the formal submission to a journal yesterday of the fruits of my labor. The main points:
1. solar forcing is time-integrated and not direct,
2. accumulation of the 0.1W/m2 increase in solar irradiance in the 20th century explains global warming,
3. there is a credible explanation for global warming that does not involve increases in human emissions of greenhouse gasses.
Figure: Cumulative solar irradiance (blue) and volcanic forcing (red) is highly correlated with HadCRU global temperature and explains the trend in temperature since 1950. The direct solar irradiance (orange) is uncorrelated with temperature.
There are a lot of other points about the model that no doubt I will get into in time. For the moment, here is the Conclusion.
Contrary to the consensus view, the historic temperature record displays high sensitivity to solar variations when related by slow equilibration dynamics. A range of results suggest that incorrect specification of the relationship between forcings and temperature may be at the heart of previous studies finding low correlations of solar variation to temperature. The accumulation model is a credible alternative mechanism for explaining both paleoclimatic temperature variability and present-day warming without recourse to increases in heat-trapping gases produced by human activities. The grounds on which a solar explanation for late 20th century warming is dismissed should be reconsidered.
(emphasis added)
Add comment
Before posting a comment, please read the Terms of Service (click here). Long links are shortened but still work. Emails not shown.
Use your Gravatar username and email address to show your custom avatar. Want your own avatar? Sign up here.
If you post an image, please upload to a photo-sharing service like ImageShack or TinyPic and use the link they provide you. Do NOT link directly to the photo's source unless you have permission.
PLEASE report all spam/inappropriate comments using the 'Report to Admin' link. If you find your post gone, it is because you violated the TOS above or it was in reply to a deleted comment.
Comments
This certainly backs my assertion that man made CO2 has not discernable signature on global climate.
Gator like!
This should get interesting.
The idea of anthropogenic causes (meaning if humans did it, humans can do something about it) is like a drug to these people. And like any drug there are the pushers intent on making a profit, keeping the addicts hooked, and eliminating any competition.
The more I consider that analogy the more accurate it seems to be. (Though the religion analogy still fits as well)
The "high" I think in this case is the idea that they are "saving the planet" even though many of them aren't doing a thing but talking.
My concern now (since it appears Hansen is collaborating on a paper that claims aerosols in the atmosphere are why it isn't warming as fast as he predicted) is that they know the climate isn't going to do what they've scared everyone into believing, and now that things are cooling they're looking for a way to flip the claims.
Somewhere I read something indicating the state of sun spot cycles and the next two we are facing give preliminary indications that are similar to the conditions that led to the Maunder Minimum.
There seems to be a lot of speculation regarding that across the web at the moment as well.
IF that is the case AND the politicians manage to screw up energy prices more than they have as it is as well as reduce reliable energy with "alternative" replacements then things are going to get very bad indeed.
Reduced growing seasons, inability to heat homes (very nasty for the elderly), animal deaths from freezing and starvation, and more. Oh yes, global cooling (just another of natures cycles with no human fingerprint needed) is some scary stuff.
Much more concerning than any of the fraudulent crap the media has been spewing for the last decade or so regarding warming.
Here are 10 very awkward questions which the high priests of the Human Caused Global Warming Religeon continually avoid like vampires retreat from garlic.
Q1. Why was the name Global Warming altered to Climate Change in the 1990s and why is it now called Global Climate Disruption?
Q2 Why is it that when we have warm weather in the spring and summer it is always described as ‘Overwhelming Evidence of Global Warming/Climate Change and in contrast why is it that when we have ice and snow in the winter we are told that it does not mean that Global Warming isn’t happening, because weather and climate are two different things?
Q3 Why was the data from so many weather stations in remote, sparseley populated and cold parts of the world i.e. Siberia, ignored by climate scientists in the 1980s in favour of data from weather stations in areas that were once remote and sparsley populated but have since over the past 50 years become highly developed and heavily populated and then used to build the computer models that predicted the Global Warming catastrophies we heard so much about in the 1990s?
Q4 Why were the same climate scientists predicting ‘A New Ice Age’ in the early 1970s which would without question of a doubt, decimate the Earth’s population by the mid 1980s, why were they wrong and why do they expect us to believe them now?
Q5 Why are just a few warm weeks in the spring and summer these days trumpeted as ‘An Unprecidented Blistering Heatwave’ when we had far longer periods of much hotter weather in the mid 1970s and early 1980s.
Q6 Why did the BBC change the colour of their weather map of Britain from lush green to desert beige in 2003?
Q7 Why is it that when ice melts during the Antarctic Summer i.e. December (which is normal) is always hailed as ‘Overwhelming Evidence of Global Warming/Climate Change’ yet when it is winter in the Antarctic with no sunlight and temperatures in the region of minus 65 - 70o with the ice growing back and surpassing its previous extents, no mention is ever made of it?
Q8 Why is it that the well documented and recorded event in history known as the medievil warm period when grapes were growing in Northern England, and Greenland was free of ice, completely ignored by climate scientists when describing today’s climate as the warmest in history?
Q9 Why is it when Russian and Scandinavian ships are stuck in the arctic sea ice for weeks on end is it never reported on the news.
Q10 Why do promoters of the theory of Global Warming always ignore the influence of the Sun and the Oceans on the Earth’s weather patterns?
We must continue to ask these and many more questions until the day the likes of Al Gore and his lackeys such as Drewski and their ilk in the Church of Global Warming can answer them properly and intelligently, only then perhaps the growing number of people such as myself might, JUST MIGHT, start to take them seriously.
Until then we must not let them off the hook.
It's June 14th for cryin' out loud!
I lived in Stuttgart in the seventies and this weather-climate reminds me of those days. We had a tornado just off the post and massive hailstorms when I lived there. Not to mention alot of snow.
Hansen can just keep changing his predictions just like all the other end-of-the-worlders, and he will get just as much respect.
RSS feed for comments to this post