Solar activity and global warming?

Unfortunately, at Yahoo Answers there is no penalty for giving deliberately false answers. Indeed half the "top ten" contributors in the category "global warming" are hard-core anti-science serial liars. As are JeffEng, Caliserv and Sagebrush on this page. Better do your own research. Some general links are below.

On the specific question of solar activity and climate see:

http://www.windows2universe.org/sun/sun_climate.ht...

http://www.skepticalscience.com/solar-activity-sun...

http://climatecrocks.com/2012/07/29/best-official-...

U.S. National Academy of Sciences, 2010:

http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=12782&...

“Climate change is occurring, is caused largely by human activities, and poses significant risks for a broad range of human and natural systems.”

http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsite...

“Choices made now about carbon dioxide emissions reductions will affect climate change impacts experienced not just over the next few decades but also in coming centuries and millennia…Because CO2 in the atmosphere is long lived, it can effectively lock the Earth and future generations into a range of impacts, some of which could become very severe.”

http://www.physics.fsu.edu/awards/NAS/

“The Academy membership is composed of approximately 2,100 members and 380 foreign associates, of whom nearly 200 have won Nobel Prizes. Members and foreign associates of the Academy are elected in recognition of their distinguished and continuing achievements in original research; election to the Academy is considered one of the highest honors that can be accorded a scientist or engineer.”

http://www.newscientist.com/topic/climate-change

http://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/200602/bac...

http://www.aip.org/history/climate/timeline.htm

http://www.aip.org/history/climate/index.htm

The Sun is certainly the Earths primary heat source, nobody doubt's that, but it is not the only cause of change in Earths climate, denier like to quote the distant past and say it was warmer then yet when they do they also like to ignore the long term increase in activity in the Sun ~10% each billion years.

So half a billion years ago (a period one of their lead experts likes to quote) the Sun was putting out 5% less than it does today yet it was warmer than it is today so clearly the Sun is not the only cause.

While denier are keen to make claims they are not so keen to post actual data as if they do this little fairytale of theirs falls apart.

This is solar activity over the last three cycles going back to the 1970's, yet Solar activity has actually dropped slightly

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Solar-cycle-data...

So solar activity dropping slightly as the planet warms, so much for the Sun's effect

What do denier offer "Burt Rutan" (a scientist?) strange I thought he was an aerospace engineer who designed aircraft, add him I guess to the odd collection of denier experts, English lords, meteorologists (who are actually TV weathermen) astronauts who were once geologists (in the late 60's) All Rutan does is rehash long disproved denier nonsense like trying to compare Co2 to oxygen and nitrogen or use (if you look at the bottom of page 10 of the PDF) the tropical water vapor level 2% rather than the global average which is half that 1%, possible why he is being used as a dupe and not someone who has an understanding of the atmosphere, as for instance water vapor levels are lower at the poles as they are higher in the atmosphere because of the effects of cold and low pressure on water vapor, effects that are different for Co2 it for instance is far less affected by cold or low pressure. Something sadly Mr Rutan has no understanding of. But this is the sort of piffle denier want to believe rather than the science.

Denier have in the past tried to make claims about the Sun influence during the extended lull in activity during one of the longest solar minimums they made many predictions of cooling and even the return of ice ages, what did we actually get 2010 was the warmest year on record and this correlation they try to draw to such extended solar minimums is based on nonsense

there was a similar one back in 1913 and no following cool period, in fact 1914 &15 where, at the time, very warm years

http://climate.nasa.gov/keyIndicators/index.cfm#gl...

and between 1910 and 1915 global temperatures trend up not down.

These sorts of short term changes like one off solar minimums have little affect on climate, the one that did is actually very different that is linked to the LIA it was a sustained minimum that last not 1-2 years but one that lasted almost 100 years, Solar activity that has (so far) not repeated.

If you look at the graph above on solar activity note the Irradience that is in effect light the primary (when it strikes the Earth) of Infrared (heat energy) i.e. what warms us.

it varies between 1366.5W/m2 (watts per square meter) and 1365.5W/m2 on average, this is a difference of ~1W/m2 on this scale 13.65W/m2 would be 1% so 1W/m2 is well under 0.1% in terms of energy change.

This is the reason most of the links used by deniers (like Jeff Engr) are in fact denier blogs, because as usual they have no science to back their claims and one of his science links doesn't work at all and the other is not about solar activity.

consistent with risk a number of the GW is by using human activity, yet no longer all by using any skill. i'm bothered by using the lifeboat complicated of recent business - or could I say older modern business societies. lots of the human species is ravenous and the easy fact is that coal and different fossil fuels is what is going to make the version between life and death for thousands and thousands. The conflict against coal is evil for that reason. i'm particular there will be an ice age rather quickly and the international cooling - to place it mildly - will make our international warming anxieties look surely stupid.

Researchers have found a slight correlation between solar activity and earth temperatures. But not that is it the cause of global warming, in fact evidence is that solar activity has had a slight cooling effect over the past few decades.

Among the most well known studies

Svensmark and Friis Christensen found a correlation but only after including the assumption of global warming of 0.14 degrees per decade. In other words they found a correlation between solar activity and the deviation from the linear trend but solar activity did not contribute to that known trend.

http://icecap.us/images/uploads/SvensmarkPaper.pdf

Willie Soon found a long term correlation, but he just stopped at 1980, so didn't look at all what is currently happening.

Usokin et al found a long term correlation but found that it stopped in recent decades. They took recent decades out of their data in order to show the long term trend but noted specifically:

"the most recent warming, since around 1975, has not been considered in the above correlations. During these last 30 years the solar total irradiance, solar UV irradiance and cosmic ray flux has not shown any significant secular trend, so that at least this most recent warming episode must have another source."

http://www.mps.mpg.de/dokumente/publikationen/sola...

Lockwood found that overall the sun would be causing cooling currently were it not for increased CO2, i.e., solar influences have masked some of the greenhouse warming

ftp://pmodwrc.ch/pub/Claus/Publications/ProcRSA_463_2447_2007.pdf

The findings of all these researchers are consistent: solar activity has some effect on earth temperatures but it has had only a fraction of the influence of greenhouse gases, and there has been no recent trend from solar influences to cause global warming. The low level of solar activity over the past 4 to 5 years has decreased the warming, not caused it.

Solar activity does indeed effect climate.

http://www.mps.mpg.de/dokumente/publikationen/sola...

But the Sun is not causing current warming.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/solar-activity-sun...

Sagebrush

<Contrary to what Baccheus stated, there most certainly is correlation between the sun, sun spots and the earth in relationship to the earth's temperature.>

Baccheus never said their isn't.

<Burt Rutan, in case you didn't know, is a real scientist>

So are these people.

1. James Hansen http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/

2. Andrew Dessler http://atmo.tamu.edu/profile/ADessler

3. Phil Jones http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Jones_%28climato...

4. Gavin Schmidt http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004...

5. Andrew Weaver http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_J._Weaver

Temperature by NASA - http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/388674main_port...

Solar activity by NASA - http://helios.gsfc.nasa.gov/cycle1.html

Solar activity is the actual driver for climate... NOT human activity.

These are the best videos on the topic, some of the world's top climate scientist appear. If you watch you will understand why the Sun drives climate and temperature and NOT people.

The Great Global Warming Swindle

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ov0WwtPcALE

Global Warming Doomsday Called Off

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-330991046...

-----------------------

Here are some links:

Nir Shaviv video of presentation to Berlin climate conference 2010

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1n2oq-XIxI

Archibald predicts temperatures to drop 2.1°C and 2.8°C in next two solar cycles.

http://joannenova.com.au/2012/01/global-cooling-co...

solar cycle length corresponds inversely with temperature

“…Friis-Christensen and Lassen (1991) …demonstrated a relationship between solar cycle length (in one cycle) and temperature over the following solar cycle…”

“…Butler and Johnson (1996). …Armagh in Northern Ireland, …0.5° C temperature decline for every extra year of solar cycle length…”

Central England: 0.6° C/yrscl

Portland Maine, and Hanover New Hampshire: 0.7° C/yrscl

http://www.davidarchibald.info/papers/Archibald200...

correlation strength between global temp analomy vs. last three solar cycle length is r^2 = 0.8911. (r squared is a statistical measure of the strength of correlation between two variables. Anything above .25 is considered to be statistically significant (r > 0.5). An r squared of 0.8911 is *extraordinarily* high, and much higher than anything associated with CO2.)

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

Svensmark GCR cloud cover link

“The correlation between the cosmic ray flux and the global cloud cover is 0.93 for the 12 months running means. The effect is larger at higher latitudes in agreement with the increased shielding effect of the Earth’s magnetic field at low latitudes. For latitudes excluding the tropics the correlation increases to even 0.97.”

Friis-Christensen, E. and Henrik Svensmark, H. (1997).What do we really know about the Sun-climate connection? Advances in Space Research, 20, 4–5, 913-921.

http://www-ssc.igpp.ucla.edu/IASTP/43/

“More than half the HadCRUT3 global temperature rise of 0.0046°C yr−1 since 1850 can be attributed solar activity. This leaves a temperature rise of 0.0022°C yr−1 since 1850 to be explained by other causes, which also may be solar with a longer time scale.

“The relations found indicates a temperature drop of 0.9°C globally during the newly started solar cycle 24. For measuring stations in Norway and Europe, the temperature decline has already started.”

Solheim, J., Humlum, O., & Stordahl, K. (2011). Temperature prognosis based on long sunspot cycle 23

http://www.au.agwscam.com/pdf/SolheimSolarTemperat...

Shaviv, N. (2008). Using the oceans as a calorimeter to quantify the solar radiative forcing. http://www.sciencebits.com/files/articles/Calorime...

Also, there are a whole series of videos on youtube about Dr. Henrik Svensmark and the connection between solar activity, cosmic rays, cloud formation, and earth temperatures. See them here:

http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL5A147AD67C7...

Happy hunting!

There are many mechanisms. I will list 10 (upper limit for answers) links for you.

2. Weather trend data linked to solar activity. This article references IPCC as well.

http://www.321gold.com/editorials/hoye/hoye040909....

3. This link goes to a number of technical documents data etc detailing the correlation and likely causation between solar activity and the earths climate patterns.

http://www.isthereglobalcooling.com/

4. This report was presented at the International Conference on Climate Change. It is a detailed look at the solar cycle, its correlation to global climate patterns and predicts fairly dramatic cooling over the next decade.

http://www.warwickhughes.com/agri/Solar_Arch_NY_Ma...

8. Web site describing satellite data for looking at weather trends on the earth

http://science.nasa.gov/newhome/headlines/essd06oc...

10. Article linking solar activity and earth’s climate. Article provides this link with a new computer model, but NASA still says greenhouse gases still supersede. Although another NASA article point out that the sun has been the most active in 1,000 years or more for the past 50 years…

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsroom/view.php...

17. CERN CLOUD experiment proving relationship between solar magnetic field strength and possible cloud formation/cover on earth.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/08/24/breaking-new...

18. New study showing STRONG negative feedback for Clouds.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/09/20/new-peer-rev...

19. Variable Solar Dynamo – solar Flux fields are degrading no more sunspots are possible after 2015 if this does not reverse.

http://www.cdejager.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09...

20. Three studies on solar physics – Fading sunspots

http://www.space.com/11960-fading-sunspots-slower-...

21. EPA Endangerment Finding for CO2 and GHG’s is questioned by OIG.

http://dailycaller.com/2011/09/28/weird-science-ep...

Hope this helps.

Contrary to what Baccheus stated, there most certainly is correlation between the sun, sun spots and the earth in relationship to the earth's temperature.

http://rps3.com/Files/Ochkosh_2010_talks/Oshkosh20... (page 38)

Burt Rutan, in case you didn't know, is a real scientist and has accomplished several astounding aeronautical feats and designs.

This is as comprehensive and yet simple as you will find.