Do You Agree With the Dutch National Space Center for the cause of Global Warming?

Question

The Dutch National Space Center, their equivalent to our NASA, has come out with a report that proves that the Sun, not man made co2 is the cause for "Global Warming".

In a paper titled "The persistent role of the Sun in climate forcing" the authors conclusively show the link between the Sun's magnetic output and global temperatures.

This peer reviewed paper concludes with the statement:

"The continuing rapid increase in carbon

dioxide concentrations during the past 10-15 years has

apparently been unable to overrule the °attening of the

temperature trend as a result of the Sun settling at a

high, but no longer increasing, level of magnetic activity.

Contrary to the argument of Lockwood and FrÄohlich, the

Sun still appears to be the main forcing agent in global

climate change."

Do you agree with this assment? Why or Why Not?

http://www.spacecenter.dk/publications/scientific-report-series/Scient_No._3.pdf/view

Answer 1

I whole heartedly agree with this assessment, since I've always knew the sun plays a huge role when it comes to the climate of our planet. That's why I feel we need to worry about the low sun spot activity that's going on right now. How long it will take to get colder, it's hard to know for sure. Hopefully, it will only be a mini ice age at the worst and not the start of a major glaciation.

Answer 2

Recently there has been a lot of interest in the area of climate change.

Histories and pre histories of societies from Anceint Egypt to Easter Island have been analysed with regard to climate change.

What we are learning is that climate change happens more often than we realise and that the modern live in is far more vulnerable to climate change than people previosly thought. We are nearing our capacity for food production and there is a real possibility that we will not produce enough food for everyone in the world in the near future.

Why the climate changes has to be understood. Natures causes and man made causes both have to be understood to predict climate change.

This finding doesn't invalidate the man made climate change theory but needs to be taken into account alongside man made climate change.

Also this is the Dutch space agency, where the best minds in Holland (who are not addled by smoking ganja all day) are employed.

Answer 3

First, it's not the Dutch National Space Center, but the DANISH National Space Center.

Second, it's Henrik Svensmark, who is behind the cosmic rays theory who've published this paper.

Third, you make it sound like this is recently released news, but this was published in 2007.

B t w, I couldn't find this publication among their peer-reviewed articles? I know you don't like that standard anyway, so I guess it doesn't matter, but we need to stay with facts right?

Answer 4

Can we say now that we are entering a much cooler period in time? There has not been a single sun spot recorded over the last 40 some days.

Here is an interesting article I found

http://www.dailytech.com/Sun+Makes+Histo...

Answer 5

No.  I didn't before, but this kinda puts a whole lotta nails in the coffin of cosmic rays affecting climate over the last 30 years:

http://www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net/8...

Answer 6

no

Answer 7

That big bad CO2 is just how nature recycles our CO2 to oxygen.Plants have done a great job to recycle our oxygen. There is another part of the plant work that most people understand. The plant keeps the C for its food. That C will break down into oil & gas. So we will never run out of oil & gas. Mother may hide it differently but it is there for Us.

Answer 8

Redleg.... Jello's quote INCLUDES the word "main".  

Answer 9

I would be more inclined to agree with the National Academy of Sciences.

http://dels.nas.edu/dels/rpt_briefs/clim...

Oh, and they didn't say the sun was the only cause for global warming, as you so gleefully state. They say "the

Sun still appears to be the main forcing agent in global

climate change."

You happen to omit the key word MAIN. Why did you do that? That's a misrepresentation! Oh, and they are far from being an equivalent of NASA!

EDIT - BB,  jello's fist sentance says...

"has come out with a report that proves that the Sun, not man made co2 is the cause for "Global Warming"."

Did you see where he said "is THE cause?" The word THE is key. If he would have said "A main cause" it would change the meaning and agree with the link, but you only saw what you wanted to see. Keep trying...

Answer 10

Dr. Jello-- we still have NO SUNSPOTS.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/200...

Answer 11

GCR rates have been higher than normal for the last several years and global temperatures have been on the decline for the last several years as well. So the theory has more data to support it than trace gases building up in the atmosphere.

http://icecap.us/images/uploads/MGCRs.jp...

http://icecap.us/images/uploads/MSUCRUvs...

.

.

Answer 12

Yes. There is good science behind Svensmark's work. He and his team have analyzed the climate forcings from all angles. He's looking at the big picture while most scientists can't see past the tailpipe of their car.

We know that the sun has much more influence on the climate than just total solar irradiance. This is evident when comparing past solar cycles to the temperature record. The level of light energy doesn't change enough in the solar cycle to explain the temperature changes observed, but the temperatures follow solar activity.

Svensmark and his team have figured out what others have not. The Sun emits a steady stream of particles toward our planet called solar wind. Solar magnetic activity is influenced by the celestial bodies in our solar system and the changing magnetic field influences the flow of particles that come our direction. Earth's magnetic field is strong enough to deflect most of these particles around our atmosphere. There are also energetic particles, mostly protons, that come from outside of our solar system called cosmic rays. Most cosmic rays originate from extrasolar sources within our own galaxy such as rotating neutron stars, supernovae, and black holes. These cosmic rays enter our atmosphere all the time and they influence the formation of low clouds by providing particles for water vapor to condense on where there are few and by providing an electrical charge. A strong solar wind will deflect some of the cosmic rays away from our atmosphere slowing the formation of clouds allowing more sunlight to reach the surface of the Earth. When the solar wind is low, like it is now, more clouds form to block or reflect sunlight away from our planet.

Solar activity has been very low for the past two years, while atmospheric CO2 has been steadily climbing and the Earth has been cooling. The Earth's average global temperature increased rapidly with increased solar activity from 1915 to 1940 when atmospheric CO2 was rather insignificant. Then, temperatures declined with solar activity from 1950 to 1979, while atmospheric CO2 levels increased rapidly. The united states has some of the highest concentrations of CO2 in the world, but US temperatures have shown little warming, compared to the global average.

Answer 13

the sun plays a large part in all of the earths environmental issues. the problem is that it isnt the only problem. does man play a part? yes, but a very tiny one. global climate change has been around since the planet was formed 4.5 billion years ago. 65 million years ago the global temperatures were higher than they are today, but the sun was cooler than today, explain that one. man wasnt around then. also 75,000 years ago, just before the last major ice age, the global climate was hotter as well. what happened?  a super volcano eruption caused a volcanic winter, and pushed the planet into an ice age that lasted 60,000 years. the climate was warming before that happened though. we know this from the geological record.

even if we were to stop emitting carbon dioxide, and remove the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, the temperatures would still continue to rise for several decades before they started to fall.

Answer 14

We live in the Modern Maximum (assuming we are still in it). It is called a maximum for a reason; lots of solar activity and associated sunspots.  During colder periods, sunspots were usually few and far between.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Sunsp...

Answer 15

Number one, it is not a peer reviewed paper.  No where does it say it is peer reviewed.  It is listed as an informal report.  If it is peer reviewed, what journal published it?

Number two, you leave out a very important word.  They say the sun is the main cause, implying there can be other causes as well.  You say the sun is the cause, implying it is the only thing that matters.  You misrepresent this paper.

They may very well be correct but it does not dismiss the influence man may have on the climate.

So to sum up, you misrepresent that this is a peer reviewed paper and then you misrepresent the conclusions....hmmmm.

Answer 16

I have said for years now that I did not believe man would have such an impact on Earth as the big light bulb in the sky could.

All the Sun would need to do is take a little breather and we are in a full on ice age.

Now they are saying that the Sun hasn't made a peep in quite sometime. This Summer I found to be mild. The high for Sydney Australia during their last summer was like 89 degrees.

Now the winter is coming. I wonder how cold it will be.

I totally agree that the Sun has more to do with our climate than Carbon Dioxide.

CO2 has always been on planet Earth. But I do not believe that CO2 causes ice ages... The Sun does!

Answer 17

Actually it's the Danish National Space Center, not the Dutch.  Take a geography lesson.

Also, the Space Center is just linking a paper by Svensmark.  They're not taking a position on the issue.

You need to get your facts straight.