Can the suns expansion cause global warming?

There is not a lot of evidence for the sun causing GW, all the evidence lies in us.

CO2 is 30% higher than it has been for 650,000 years. Methane is 130% greater. These are two of the main pollutants humans put into the atmosphere in excess, and they are two of the primary greenhouse gases.

Look at the 'hockeystick', which shows a dramatic warming since 1950 after a fairly stable climate for 1000 years. In fact, the 10 hottest years in recorded history have all happened since 1990, with 2005 being the hottest, and 2006 is shaping up to maybe break that record.

(see links below)

How's that for proof of man's fault in this? There is ample proof, any real scientist will tell you that.

There has NEVER been an article doubting man's influence on global warming published in a peer-reviewed journal. A recent study of almost 1000 proved that.

Yes, the earth naturally heats and cools, but the rate and amount we are warming now is unprecedented in the recent geologic past. We are doing this, and we must stop it. This is not some political statement or rhetoric. This is science trying to educate a crass, ignorant public of the damage they are doing. The magnitude of temperature increase ALREADY is about 10x that of the 'little ice age' of the middle ages, and rate and amount are only going up.

Just to be clear, glacial and interglacial cycles are mainly controlled by astronomical fluctuations, but we have a detailed record of the last 7 cycles, and what the climate and CO2 is doing now is way different and extreme. The rate of increase is much higher than in the past AND the value itself is much higher.

HI CO2:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4467420.stm

HOCKEY STICK:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/5109188.stm

General climate stuff:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3897061.stm

We all know that the sun is going to become a red giant in about five billion years. But if you compare a thousand years to five billion, you'll find that even if the growth were constant (it's not supposed to be), we would expect less than a millionth of that growth to have occurred during that time... and we don't even have that long to deal with because most of the observed global temperature changes we've seen have been in only the last hundred years.

Likewise, recent analysis of the sun's diameter have lead some scientists to the conclusion that the sun has been shrinking during times in the last century, perhaps as part of a growth/shrinking cycle. The first link below references the major point of that discussion. Since the temperature trend has been constantly upward and not shrinking and growing, that would tend to argue against any solar size correlation for the observed global temperature data as well.

Solar activity can certainly influence global climate, and in the long run will cause far more warming than we can manage. Also, the "little ice age", roughly 1645 to 1715, was associated with a period of almost zero sun spot activity. However, solar activity over the last hundred years has not changed enough to account for the increase in global temperatures, which does appear to be well correlated with the increase in CO2 output.

The reason it was dismissed is that scientists know the facts. They have good information about exactly how much the sun has expanded in the last 100 years, when manmade global warming started, because we started burning a lot of fossil fuels.

The expansion of the sun in that time is very very tiny, not anywhere enough to cause the observed temperature rise. Pure science, not crazy political stuff.

The sun has not changed its size materially in the time people have been observing it. (There was a report that it was in fact shrinking, but that turned out to be an observation error.) But the earth's temperature has been fluctuating since the time it was made. You may recall that there were something like eleven ice ages over the past few hundred thousand years, and obviously there was both warming and cooling during those eras. The popular notion is that the observed increasing level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has been (or will be) responsible, but that is based on computer models which, as any weather forecaster can tell you, are not nearly as reliable as one might like. Too little attention has been paid to carbon dioxide dissolved in seawater, of which there is fifty times as much as is loose in the atmosphere.

I didn't know that the sun is expanding. If it is, then it probably a good thing seeing as how the planets are slowly moving away from eachother due to the expansion of the universe. I did think, however, that the sun output of heat and light was deteriorating which makes it hard to believe that the sun is expanding.

I believe that what is driving global warming is the burning of fossil fuels, and the accumulation of gases in the atmosphere that prevent heat to leave earth. This is what causes global warming, it is otherwise referred to as the green house effect.

no, both sun and earth are separate cosmic obejcts in one term and many of the times earths internal chemical and physical process mostly causing the warming. But humans largely affecting it too so you pick the border!

In a few Billion years when the Sun is a Red Giant I'd have to say yes.

Although it is the most likely culprit of global warming, people can't accept it as the cause because they couldn't blame George Bush for it.

Instead it is because of a 0.008 % increase in CO2