Correlation of Global Temperature, Sunspots, Solar Irradiance, Cosmic Rays
1–10 of 29 posts
Re: Correlation of Global Temperature, Sunspots, Solar Irradiance, Cosmic Rays
#2Re: Correlation of Global Temperature, Sunspots, Solar Irradiance, Cosmic Rays
#3This community isn't prepared to even begin looking at any evidence that the main driver of climate change is the sun. That raises too many questions
Re: Correlation of Global Temperature, Sunspots, Solar Irradiance, Cosmic Rays
#4There has been a correlation over the past ~10k years between solar activity and global temperatures. This non peer-reviewed book seems to spread the (false) message that this correlation still holds. However, it thereby neglects the role of CO2 as a primary mechanism of global temperature.
For the past ~10k years before the industrial revolution, CO2 levels have been almost constant at ~290 ppm. Therefore, the other drivers of climate change dominated. Now that CO2 is rising at unprecedented levels (see e.g. [1]), the other influencers of climatic change are no longer the driving forces. CO2 is the world's thermostat knob [2]. It is undeniable.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_in_Earth%27s_at...
[2] https://science.sciencemag.org/content/330/6002/356.abstract
Re: Correlation of Global Temperature, Sunspots, Solar Irradiance, Cosmic Rays
#5Probably not: https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/189/graphic-tempe...
The scale on the right for temperature is a change of about 2 parts per 255 degrees Kelvin. The scale on the left is about 3 parts in 1361. It's not clear whether the much smaller variation in irradiance would be expected to cause the much larger change in temperature. Seems unlikely, since the power radiated by a black body varies as the 4th power of the temperature (Stefan-Boltzman law).
Relies on - "Reconstruction of spectral solar irradiance since 1700 from simulated magnetograms"
Re: Correlation of Global Temperature, Sunspots, Solar Irradiance, Cosmic Rays
#6Probably not: https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/189/graphic-tempe...
The chart on that page shows the solar radiation as a (somewhat) instantaneous measure, against the global temperature which is a cummulative amount. The annual solar radiation jumps from a lower value to a higher value right about where the temperature starts increasing. It seems a reasonable theory to think that more radiation started coming in each year, and without an outlet it caused the temperature to start rising.
This doesn't mean that we haven't been making things worse, or that there's nothing we can do. But it's crucial for us to understand everything that's impacting the climate, so we can make good decisions.
Re: Correlation of Global Temperature, Sunspots, Solar Irradiance, Cosmic Rays
#7There has been a correlation over the past ~10k years between solar activity and global temperatures. This non peer-reviewed book seems to spread the (false) message that this correlation still holds. However, it thereby neglects the role of CO2 as a primary mechanism of global temperature. For the past ~10k years before the industrial revolution, CO2 levels have been almost constant at ~290 ppm. Therefore, the other…
> However, it thereby neglects the role of CO2 as a primary mechanism of global temperature.
From the book desription[1]:
> For example, there is an absence of any physical evidence that CO2 causes global warming, so the only argument for CO2 as the cause of warming rests entirely in computer modeling. Thus, the question becomes, how accurate are the computer models in predicting climate? What other variables could be missing from the models?
It does not neglect, but disputes. Whether that disputation is successful is above my pay-grade.
[1]https://www.sciencedirect.com/book/9780128045886/evidence-ba...
Re: Correlation of Global Temperature, Sunspots, Solar Irradiance, Cosmic Rays
#8There has been a correlation over the past ~10k years between solar activity and global temperatures. This non peer-reviewed book seems to spread the (false) message that this correlation still holds. However, it thereby neglects the role of CO2 as a primary mechanism of global temperature. For the past ~10k years before the industrial revolution, CO2 levels have been almost constant at ~290 ppm. Therefore, the other…
> However, it thereby neglects the role of CO2 as a primary mechanism of global temperature. From the book desription[1]: > For example, there is an absence of any physical evidence that CO2 causes global warming, so the only argument for CO2 as the cause of warming rests entirely in computer modeling. Thus, the question becomes, how accurate are the computer models in predicting climate? What other variables could b…
That book can claim what it wants. I am waiting for the science to back up those claims.
Physical evidence of CO2 causing global warming has been presented for over 120 years. Arrhenius was the first to propose that such a mechanism can cause global warming [1]. Please wake up to the 20th century. Snooze, and wake up to the 21st. Global warming due to CO2 increases in the atmosphere is real.
If you have any peer-reviewed science contradicting my claims, please present them.
[1] http://www.rsc.org/images/Arrhenius1896_tcm18-173546.pdf
Re: Correlation of Global Temperature, Sunspots, Solar Irradiance, Cosmic Rays
#9Probably not: https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/189/graphic-tempe...
The chart on that page shows the solar radiation as a (somewhat) instantaneous measure, against the global temperature which is a cummulative amount. The annual solar radiation jumps from a lower value to a higher value right about where the temperature starts increasing. It seems a reasonable theory to think that more radiation started coming in each year, and without an outlet it caused the temperature to start ris…
The major drivers of climate change are known. Pretending the "science isn't settled" is sticking your head in the sand. Solar irradiance, CO2 and water vapor are important, but some are more important than others.
Educate yourself. Here's a link: https://climate.nasa.gov/nasa_science/science/
edit: I meant the "science isn't settled" above
edit2: Changed "All the drivers" to "The major drivers" because "all" is too presumptuous
Re: Correlation of Global Temperature, Sunspots, Solar Irradiance, Cosmic Rays
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
The chart on that page shows the solar radiation as a (somewhat) instantaneous measure, against the global temperature which is a cummulative amount. The annual solar radiation jumps from a lower value to a higher value right about where the temperature starts increasing. It seems a reasonable theory to think that more radiation started coming in each year, and without an outlet it caused the temperature to start ris…
The major drivers of climate change are known. Pretending the "science isn't settled" is sticking your head in the sand. Solar irradiance, CO2 and water vapor are important, but some are more important than others. Educate yourself. Here's a link: https://climate.nasa.gov/nasa_science/science/ edit: I meant the "science isn't settled" above edit2: Changed "All the drivers" to "The major drivers" because "all" is too…
> All the drivers of climate change are known.
That's a fairly presumptuous, unscientific statement. Global climate is an extremely complex phenomenon. We certainly do not know all the drivers of it.