Is the Myth that Man is causing so-called "Global Warming" now refuted by Scientist?

Question

As we have noted many times, perhaps the biggest impact on the Earth's climate over time has been the sun.

For instance, researchers at the Max Planck Institute for Solar Research in Germany report the sun has been burning more brightly over the last 60 years, accounting for the 1 degree Celsius increase in Earth's temperature over the last 100 years.

R. Timothy Patterson, professor of geology and director of the Ottawa-Carleton Geoscience Center of Canada's Carleton University, says that "CO2 variations show little correlation with our planet's climate on long, medium and even short time scales."

Rather, he says, "I and the first-class scientists I work with are consistently finding excellent correlations between the regular fluctuations of the sun and earthly climate. This is not surprising. The sun and the stars are the ultimate source of energy on this planet."

Patterson, sharing Tapping's concern, says: "Solar scientists predict that, by 2020, the sun will be starting into its weakest Schwabe cycle of the past two centuries, likely leading to unusually cool conditions on Earth."

"Solar activity has overpowered any effect that CO2 has had before, and it most likely will again," Patterson says. "If we were to have even a medium-sized solar minimum, we could be looking at a lot more bad effects than 'global warming' would have had."

A Hoover Institution Study a few years back examined historical data and came to a similar conclusion.

"The effects of solar activity and volcanoes are impossible to miss. Temperatures fluctuated exactly as expected, and the pattern was so clear that, statistically, the odds of the correlation existing by chance were one in 100," according to Hoover fellow Bruce Berkowitz.

The study says that "try as we might, we simply could not find any relationship between industrial activity, energy consumption and changes in global temperatures."

The study concludes that if you shut down all the world's power plants and factories, "there would not be much effect on temperatures."

But if the sun shuts down, we've got a problem. It is the sun, not the Earth, that's hanging in the balance.

http://www.ibdeditorial.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=287279412587175

Answer 1

I hope I live long enough to see Al Gore and his followers tried and convicted of fraud.  Anthropogenic Global Warming is the mother of all long cons.  

Answer 2

Sure, its refuted by scientist; if you put an S on the end of that it wouldn't be so correct.

Answer 3

It's the democrats way of saying: Vote for Me and we can stop this! It's saying that they want us to get rid of our big cars and china has 30,000 more people than america has, so right then global warming is fake!  

Answer 4

Hmmm.  Hmmmm...ahhh...no.

Answer 5

Your last paragraph is too funny for words:

"But if the sun shuts down, we've got a problem. It is the sun, not the Earth, that's hanging in the balance."

How, exactly, is the sun hanging in the balance?  Are you talking about the fact that it will burn out in about two billion years?  Should we start stepping up our greenhouse gas production now so we'll last a few more days when it goes out?  ROTFL!!!!!

Answer 6

I think the last paragraph of your comment, which is also the last paragraph of your story link show completely the real level of knowledge you and the scientists" you quote, have on this subject, i.e, zero.

And while it is cool to name scientists at the Max Planck Institute without actually giving a name or a link, that is also up to your usual standard.

But guess what Max Planck have a home page here is a link

http://www.mps.mpg.de/en/projekte/sun-cl...

their own graph shows shows no sign of increase in brightness (irradiance) since the 40s I think you have swallowed the Heartland BS hook line and sinker.

Jeff M: I was not stating one way or the other that i thought the Max Planck info was correct, just that Jellos comment on them was at right angles to their position, and unless my math fails me 1938 is before the 40s anyway, if you don't like the Planck graph this is the NASA one for world temp and it shows a decline of 0.1 from 1940 to the mid 70s and then an increase to 0.6 above the mean and despite the attempts of jello and others here there has been no decline since 98 the temp has stayed on average around 0.6 above the mean and even the sizable drop in 99 & 2000 were still 0.4 above the mean, anyone who's sees a cooling trend in that needs to see an optometrist.

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs...

but I suppose they are being deceptive as well.

Answer 7

Regardless of how and when the warming started, human activity is most certainly contributing to it, and contributing to a large scale problem that is not too far away.  It behooves us all to stop trying to deny it and do something about it (well actually its more about what we shouldn't be doing, namely buring too much fossil fuels)

Answer 8

From the first mention it did not sound right, but when I saw the hockey stick graph I knew immediately is was fraud first class. Others who failed history and geology still are unable to comprehend why we say fraud instead of getting down on our knees and begging monsignor AL for grace!

Answer 9

I'd like to point out that antarctic's comment about "no increase since the 40's is deceptive- the 40's was another warm period.Right after the "dust bowl" , the warmest year on record, 1938, and a time of such low arctic ice, that the northwwst passage was repeatedly navigated.

     This is like the comparison of arctic ice now, to arctic ice in the 1970's. The 70's were a cold period, so of course there was more ice then. Remember the "coming ice age" scare of that time? It's an example of data selection to make their case.

      

Answer 10

As I'm sure we all know, this current warming cycle started about 18,000 years ago with the end of the last ice age. At that time, glacial ice stood a mile high and crushed the life out of the land where we have now built London, New York, where green forests now teem with life.

Thanks to global warming, the glaciers have been driven back over 2,000 miles, the oceans have risen hundreds of feet, the land now is covered by lush forests, farmland and human habitation where once only deadly ice stood.

Man did not cause this warming process and elimination of ALL man's input cannot stop it.

Serious scientists are angered at the money-grabbing 'carbon cap and trade' scheme that the UN and Al Gore came up with to fill their own pockets.  They are so angry that over 30,000 real scientists have submitted a petition to refute the scheme.

And, as we all know, Al Gore is the founder and Director of "Generation Investment Management Corporation", established to receive those carbon offset payments and to make its investors rich in the process.

Yes, the Sun is the primary driving force.  As well, fluctuating volcanic activity affects ocean temperatures and global climate.