Cancun sun speeds decay of global warming charade

[Bonam]

because it's idiotic...the sun cannot affect one planet and not the others, solar activity is downwe should be cooling not warming...

Solar activity relates to the frequency of the occurrence of sunspots, solar flares, and coronal mass ejections. Also, it follows a ~10.7 year cycle. This solar activity cycle should not cause any long term shifts in climate since it is periodic on a decade timescale.

Medium term variations in solar activity are of some interest. For example, the Maunder minimum corresponds with the "little ice age". If you note the graph on that page, it shows that current solar activity has been at a prolonged maximum since reaching a peak in the late 50s (with a small dip in the 70s). This solar activity does correlate with net solar irradiation received by the Earth. So the Sun has been heating the Earth more in the last ~50 years than it has been in the prior ~400 years of time (for which sunspot records are available). Climate papers suggest, however, that these effects of solar activity are insufficient to explain the observed rise in Earth's temperature (they contribute a part of it but are not enough to explain the whole). Anyway, I don't know the magnitudes of the observed temperature rise on Mars but it could be explained by these observations.

If you look at a longer term graph of solar activity variations, it also suggest that periods of high solar actvity relate directly to the Earth's temperatures. The Medieval Maximum relates to the warm period of that time, the Sporer Minimum relates to another cold period, etc.

Over extremely long timescales, solar evolution would cause changes in climate, the Sun is believed to get on the order of ~0.01% brighter every million years throughout the ten billion years of its main sequence life, as the proportions of hydrogen and helium in its core slowly change. 2-3 billion years ago when the Sun was less bright, scientists theorize the atmosphere and surface of Venus could have been comparable to Earth's conditions today. Anyway, effects on these timescales are not relevant for the climate change debate.

Edited December 15, 2010 by Bonam

[Saipan]

I don't know ask an astronomer.

Last week they said it'll be warmer, but it's colder.

[wyly]

Why would there be no lag?

well there is and there isn't, confusing yes...the denialist claim was CO2 spike comes well after a temp increase(the lag) therefore they claim this warming can't be the result of todays CO2 increase...but CO2 can also drive temp...so today we have a preceeding CO2 increase driving temp and there still will be a lag once the oceans warm and hit us with even more CO2 peaking x-number of years/centuries from now...

So there is a lag?

typo on my part I left out a word..."there was no event that occured 800yrs ago that explains this increase"... Edited December 15, 2010 by wyly

[Saipan]

typo on my part I left out a word..."there was no event that occured 800yrs ago that explains this increase"...

Medieval warm period ENDED 800 years ago.

[bloodyminded]

Medieval warm period ENDED 800 years ago.

No warming at all.

According to you.

[Saipan]

Denying again?

[bloodyminded]

Denying again?

Are you becoming confused?

[wyly]

Medieval warm period ENDED 800 years ago.

then there would have been a sustained CO2 climb(and warming) until today...CO2 levels remained very constant before, during and after the MWP and through the little ice age at levels between 270-285ppm, the CO2 increase began about mid 19th century...

which supports the thought that the MWP and little ice age were not major global events on the scale we are seeing now...

the event which coincides with today's CO2 rise was not the MWP but the Industrial Revolution which began 250-150 yrs ago

Edited December 15, 2010 by wyly

[wyly]

doublepost

Edited December 15, 2010 by wyly

[Wild Bill]

cry me a river... I give as good as I get. FWIW, as has been stated several times in the past when someone complains about (lost) decorum/civility... that ship long sailed around climate change discussion. In the face of absolute denier lies, fabrications and distortions... (at times) purposeful denier lies, fabrications and distortions, we'll see the usual suspects top that all by whining about (lost) decorum/civility... whining while they at the same time throw their next loaded barrage of insults or taunts. Hypocritical whiners.

Let me see if I understand you correctly. You would insult me because someone ELSE insulted you? Or not even you, but someone else who agreed with you?

I don't know the word offhand to describe that type of thinking. If it had to do with race it would be racism but since it's with ideas and civility the proper term escapes me at the moment.

Perhaps someone else could help out...

[Saipan]

then there would have been a sustained CO2 climb(and warming) until today

No, it doesn't.

Climate is CHANGING. Nothing is "sustained". Glacial and Interglacial periods.......

[lukin]

Waldo, it's too bad absolutely nothing materialized from the Cancun vacation summit. China continues to pollute at a rapid rate. When is the next hopey-changey, feel-good climate summit.

[Michael Hardner]

Why revive a thread from 2010?

[lukin]

Why revive a thread from 2010?

i like to relive a few threads in which miracles were promised, yet nothing transpired. I was right again about this Cancun debacle.

[waldo]

Why revive a thread from 2010?

let him think he's topical! Somehow, as knowledgeable as he self-proclaims, he missed out on Durban's 2011 COP17/CMP7

[lukin]

yes, it is excellent news, wyly - of course, none of the China bashers around here will be pleased!

China plays people like you waldo for a fool. They have done nothing.