Are global warming deniers sceptics likely to lessen with this new information?

Not a chance. To be blunt, the theory that the Sun is causing the current global warming has been completely disproven for years. The climate scientists over at RealClimate recently said about solar warming:

"That's a coffin with so many nails in it already that the hard part is finding a place to hammer in a new one."

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007...

The essence of denialists is that nothing will convince them they're wrong, no matter how strong the evidence. If they need to, they'll just find a new "theory" explaining why humans aren't causing global warming, or why it's a good thing that we are.

To address Tyler - I didn't watch his YouTube video, but "the scientific evidence of the correlation of CO2 to be inversely related to temperature"? Are you serious? You're trying to argue that a greenhouse gas causes temperatures to decrease?

Please crack open a science book and read up on the greenhouse effect. If you don't understand the most basic science, you're certainly not going to understand the man-made global warming theory. And if you don't understand the theory, you shouldn't be forming conclusions about whether or not it's right.

This is a great example of the problem with global warming 'skeptics' - generally they simply don't understand the science. They think the Sun is causing global warming even though its output has not increased on average over the past 30 years as global temperatures have increased 0.5°C, or they think the greenhouse effect doesn't exist, or have some other very basic scientific misunderstanding.

I only have two issues, (1.) Where did the heat come from in the first place? (2.) Why is NASA undertaking such a rush study of solar flares? They know how unpredictable it is, but h_ll, it's just the sun.

Edit (Bob), that's the most generalized description of solar radiation a extremist has ever proclaimed. Maybe planet killers? Here read this:

http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/flares.shtml

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2006/10mar_stor...

The list is endless.........

No Co2 is not causing the warming it's a retention factor. You said so yourself??? Chicken and the egg...you and Dana both need some remedial studies.

Heck I'm going to report myself...I do apologize to the poser of this question and the others. But the logic implied by the alarmist is beyond any type of comprehension.

The theory of greenhouse gases also also been debunked several times by real scientists, not some scientists who are just tools for al gore's propaganda. Global warming is not caused by humans, end of discussion.

Dana, solar flares can disrupt the Earth's magnetic field causing more absorption of the sun's direct rays.

If is was absolutely proven, why hasn't anyone come out and say they are 100% positive? Cause they can't.

Mady, you can't change the minds of the arrogant. You seem arrogant with your claims that you have facts and skeptics has false data. You should look in the mirror before you judge someone.

I would first like to give a word to Ammego Mccain!! and others like him:When you say you are burning your trash, not recycling, and so on, you will be the ones that suffer most, and what you are doing is out of pure greed, ignorance, and arrogancy. And when people like you say that they believe in the bible, obviously not. You are contradicting yourself. You should be arrested. That is far worse than dealing crack, which btw your famed George Dubya used to do.

Second of all to answer your questions: Skeptics will be Skeptics, they have false answers, and we have facts. We will rarely change the minds of the arrogant, but save the lives of others.

In 20 years, when the sever consequences come into play, they will be impacted first, and the worst. And they will be looking back and thinking, damn, we should've listened to the facts, and such.

It will only lessen the "cosmic ray" theorists...there are other explanations much more plausible than CO2. For all we know, man COULD be responsible...but it could be in the form of microwave pollution. Temperature rise correlates nicely with the increase of microwave use as a communications medium...and water vapor is a much better greenhouse gas than CO2.

Until man better understands this complex system, I will continue to believe the Sun warms the Earth.

Holding a bit more of the sun's heat in? How Bob? How in the world can a compound that is at the sole mercy of its environment have any special qualities, such as the thermal qualities that you so eloquently and ridiculously state? There is absolutely NO WAY! CO2 cannot retain its heat for 24 hours, much less for the amount of time that you alarmists allege. It is just plain not common sense, impossible and just plain ludicrous. Then that light spectra thing.... LOLOL That just sends it over the top...

Funny how the weather men and women always say high pressure system, low pressure system, dew point and humidity. Funny, they never say it's gonna be hot cause CO2 is high today....

A few will understand this science.

"I have just two questions. (1.) Where did the heat come from in the first place?"

OK, two answers.

The Sun. But the _warming_ is caused by CO2 holding just a bit more of the Sun's heat in.

"(2.) Why is NASA undertaking such a rush study of solar flares?"

Solar flares are important because they disrupt radio communications and endanger astronauts. Not because they can warm the Earth significantly (they can't).

I suppose 20 years of solar data proves this theory is NOT correct?

Unfortunately I don't think so. This theory has been debunked earlier and it doesn't stop the deniers claims about "it's the sun". Hopefully though it can make some real sceptics rethink.

Interesting article b t w.