New Study: Sun controls climate, not CO2!!!

[IanC]

[Yeah, because proxy indicators showed a decline when direct instrument measurements showed an increase in temperature where the data overlapped, therefore proxies are an unreliable source of temperature data.

hahaha, I dont think I have ever agreed with you before! yes, they are unreliable.

interestingly, the tree ring proxies that were kept and used in most of the spagetti graph contributors, are now losing their hockey stick shape since additional data has been added.

personally I think tree rings are useful to give a general range and direction of temperatures as long as they are not cherry picked to give evidence for a pre-formed conclusion. or manipulated to give overwhelming weight to a few outliers. eg. Mann's work

 

[Old Rocks]

Our part in the input to the carbon problem is so insignificant as to be irremedial compared to the total by any effort we can make. Yet our influence as a species could be just enough to forestall a much worse environmental situation an ice age.

Warming can be beneficial and be adapted to in numerous ways but an ice pack down to the Ohio river would destroy civilization as we know it.

It has been learned through geological science that ice advanced that far south in mere decades.

Link?

 

[Old Rocks]

[Yeah, because proxy indicators showed a decline when direct instrument measurements showed an increase in temperature where the data overlapped, therefore proxies are an unreliable source of temperature data.

hahaha, I dont think I have ever agreed with you before! yes, they are unreliable.

interestingly, the tree ring proxies that were kept and used in most of the spagetti graph contributors, are now losing their hockey stick shape since additional data has been added.

personally I think tree rings are useful to give a general range and direction of temperatures as long as they are not cherry picked to give evidence for a pre-formed conclusion. or manipulated to give overwhelming weight to a few outliers. eg. Mann's work

Ian, you know damned well that there were many other proxies besides tree rings. And that you are constantly harping on them simply demonstrates that your objections to AGW has nothing to do with science, and everything to do with politics. Dozens of studies in differant nations by differant researchers has confirmed the Hockey Stick Graph.

 

[skookerasbil]

95% of all warming since basically forever = from the sun!!!

Published in the Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics

New paper finds strong evidence the Sun has controlled climate over the past 11 000 years not CO2 Principia Scientific Intl

 

[BULLDOG]

95% of all warming since basically forever = from the sun!!!

Published in the Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics

New paper finds strong evidence the Sun has controlled climate over the past 11 000 years not CO2 Principia Scientific Intl

Of course warming comes from the sun. There is no other heat source available in our little part of the galaxy. I have no reason to distrust the study you refer to. Now, according to the scientific method, others will try to duplicate their results to determine if it stands up to scrutiny, and will analyze the effects described in light of known data. When all that is done, and scientists are convinced your claims are right, I will gladly admit I was wrong, and do my best to understand the new information, but until then, only an idiot would say this disproves the accepted scientific explanation of climate change.

 

[saveliberty]

Hopefully CO2's self esteem isn't too damaged too much by this report...

 

[BULLDOG]

Hopefully CO2's self esteem isn't too damaged too much by this report...

The right hopes for all kinds of crazy stuff.

 

[rdean]

Funny, a state like Texas will cut 5 billion from education and then insist they know more about science than scientists.

 

[BULLDOG]

Funny, a state like Texas will cut 5 billion from education and then insist they know more about science than scientists.

As always........here in Texas............When it comes to crazy heartless politicians........
WE'RE NUMBER ONE!!!!!!

 

[mamooth]

The paper cited in the OP only covered up to 1895. Of course solar changes were more important than CO2 back then, being the CO2 didn't vary much.

That is, the paper basically reinforced the standard climate science theories, which is why it's so funny to see kooks claiming it refutes climate science.

 

[skookerasbil]

What this research displays very clearly is........nobody knows shit about shit with this climate science stuff........in other words, its not science and in 2014, zero conclusions can be drawn.

From the researchers..........

Firstly, the assumption that solar activity peaked in 1960 and declined since is false, since it is necessary to determine the accumulated solar energy over multiple solar cycles, which is the accumulated departure from the average number of sunspots over the entire period, which I call the "sunspot integral." The sunspot integral is plotted in blue and shows remarkable correction with global temperatures plotted in red below. Correlating sunspot and temperature data with and without CO2, we find the sunspot integral explains 95% of temperature change over the past 400 years, and that CO2 had no significant influence (also here).

Secondly, this paper finds strong evidence of a 30-40 year lag between solar activity and temperature response. So what happened ~40 years after the 1960 peak in sunspot activity? Why that just so happens to be when satellite measurements of global temperature peaked with the 1998 El Nino [which is also driven by solar activity], followed by the "pause" and cooling since.

We have thus shown

• 
  
• Strong correlation between solar activity and climate over the past 11,000 years of the Holocene
  
• Strong lack of correlation between CO2 and climate over the past 11,000 years of the Holocene
  
• Solar activity explains all 6 well-known warming periods that have occurred during the Holocene, including the current warm period
  
• The 20th century peak in sunspot activity is associated with a 40 year lag in the peak global temperature

 

[mamooth]

That's nice skook. You've shown that prior to the industrial age, changing CO2 was not the main driver of climate change. Which everyone already knew.

However, it's the industrial age now.

 

[skookerasbil]

That's nice skook. You've shown that prior to the industrial age, changing CO2 was not the main driver of climate change. Which everyone already knew.

However, it's the industrial age now.

That's right.........so 600 years ago, huge amounts of warming had nothing to do with CO2 but now of course, its ALL CO2.

OK s0n.............


New Evidence Suggests 8216 Medieval Warming Period 8217 Was Global Proof of Naturally-Occurring Global Warming TheBlaze.com

 

[Billy_Bob]

Funny, a state like Texas will cut 5 billion from education and then insist they know more about science than scientists.

As always........here in Texas............When it comes to crazy heartless politicians........
WE'RE NUMBER ONE!!!!!!

the liberal left wit appeal to heart strings... Guess what moron, science isn't about heart strings its about FACTS! Which the AGW crowd has none, except those they made up and lied about..

 

[Billy_Bob]

That's nice skook. You've shown that prior to the industrial age, changing CO2 was not the main driver of climate change. Which everyone already knew.

However, it's the industrial age now.

And nothing has changed.... Moron

 

[Old Rocks]

There was no huge warming 600 years ago. Virtually every serious study shows that the increase globally was about 0.2 C. Europe and Greenland were warmer, but at the same time, other areas were colder.

Figure 6: Composite Northern Hemisphere land and land plus ocean temperaturereconstructions and estimated 95% confidence intervals. Shown for comparison are published Northern Hemisphere reconstructions (Mann 2008).

Not a single reconstruction shows the warming 600 years ago as even beginning to approach that we see today.

 

[skookerasbil]

95% of temperature change over the past 400 years due to................the sun!!!

 

[skookerasbil]

By the way.........since 1995, climate scientists and global warming advocates have fallen all over themselves to purge the MWP from climate discussions and in climate textbooks.


Why?

I'll tell you why.........

Because it absolutely devastates their established narrative........particularly when you realize that we have upped our atmospheric CO2 levels by 1/11,000th


Oh.....and to put into clear perspective, this issue of CO2..........its a joke >>>

Who s Afraid of CO2 NCPA

5,000ppm MIGHT have some negative consequences and these dolts are screaming and its about 400ppm.

 

[elektra]

CO2 in the atmosphere is insignificant.

So says the Sun.

 

[Billy_Bob]

There was no huge warming 600 years ago. Virtually every serious study shows that the increase globally was about 0.2 C. Europe and Greenland were warmer, but at the same time, other areas were colder.

Figure 6: Composite Northern Hemisphere land and land plus ocean temperaturereconstructions and estimated 95% confidence intervals. Shown for comparison are published Northern Hemisphere reconstructions (Mann 2008).

Not a single reconstruction shows the warming 600 years ago as even beginning to approach that we see today.

Still using Michale Mann's discredited bull shit as proof...