Scientists debunk deniers silly "sunspots cause global warming" scam
Harry Hope
http://www.newspostonline.com/science/sunspots-dont-cause-global-warming-say-scientists-2009121877953
Dec 18, 2009
Sunspots don�t cause global warming, say scientists
Leading scientists have dismissed studies which say that global
warming is a natural phenomenon connected with sunspots, rather than
the result of the man-made emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2).
According to a report in The Independent, the researchers, all experts
in climate or solar science, said that the scientific evidence
continually cited by skeptics to promote the idea of sunspots being
the cause of global warming is deeply flawed.
Studies published in 1991 and 1998 claimed to establish a link between
global temperatures and solar activity � sunspots � and continue to be
cited by climate skeptics.
However, problems with the data used to establish the correlation have
been identified by other experts and the flaws are now widely accepted
by the scientific community, even though the studies continue to be
used to support the idea that global warming is �natural�.
The issue has gained new importance in the light of opinion polls
showing that nearly one in two people now believe global warming is a
natural phenomenon unconnected with CO2 emissions.
Powerful support for this idea came in 1991 when Eigil
Friis-Christensen, director of the Danish National Space Centre,
published a study showing a remarkable correlation between global
warming and the length of sunspot cycles.
A further study published in 1998 by Friis-Christensen and his
colleague Henrik Svensmark suggested a possible explanation for the
warming trend with a link between solar activity, cosmic rays and the
formation of clouds.
However, many scientists now believe both of these studies are
seriously flawed, and that when errors introduced into the analysis
are removed, the correlations disappear, with no link between sunspots
and global warming.
According to Peter Laut, a former adviser to the Danish Energy Agency
who first identified the flaws, there were practically no observations
to support the idea that variations in sunspots played more than a
minor role in global warming.
Laut�s analysis of the flaws is accepted by most scientists familiar
with the research, including Paul Crutzen, an atmospheric chemist at
the Max Planck Institute in Germany, who won a Nobel Prize for his
work on understanding the hole in the ozone layer.
�There is definitely a problem (with these studies). Laut has really
pinned it down but the (sunspot) argument keeps reappearing and its
quite irritating.� Professor Crutzen said.
�I�ve looked into this quite closely and I�m on Laut�s side in terms
of his analysis of the data,� said Professor Stefan Rahsmstorf, of
Potsdam University. (ANI)
_________________________________________________________
Harry
James
> http://www.newspostonline.com/science/sunspots-dont-cause-global-warming-say-scientists-2009121877953
>
> Dec 18, 2009
>
> Sunspots don't cause global warming, say scientists
>
>
> Leading scientists have dismissed studies which say that global
> warming is a natural phenomenon connected with sunspots, rather than
> the result of the man-made emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2).
>
Yeah, all those solar storms couldn't cause anything. Why hell, those astronauts and cosmonaughts could get a nice tan.
pyjamarama
> http://www.newspostonline.com/science/sunspots-dont-cause-global-warm...
>
> Dec 18, 2009
>
> Sunspots don’t cause global warming, say scientists
>
> Leading scientists have dismissed studies which say that global
> warming is a natural phenomenon connected with sunspots, rather than
> the result of the man-made emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2).
>
> According to a report in The Independent, the researchers, all experts
> in climate or solar science, said that the scientific evidence
> continually cited by skeptics to promote the idea of sunspots being
> the cause of global warming is deeply flawed.
Yeah, how silly to think the sun, just eight light minutes away and
the source of all light and heat on Earth could have any effect on
surface temperatures...
Must be those Escalades...
And you wonder why your "cause" has become a global laughingstock.
You shouldn't.
>
> However, problems with the data used to establish the correlation have
> been identified by other experts and the flaws are now widely accepted
> by the scientific community, even though the studies continue to be
> used to support the idea that global warming is “natural”.
Is this the same "scientific community" who manipulated data,
threatened violence against those scientists with opposing theories,
admitted to "tricks" and destroying dissenting data?
Time to find a new crisis, hairless.
This one is spent.
Claudius Denk
> http://www.newspostonline.com/science/sunspots-dont-cause-global-warm...
>
>
> Sunspots don’t cause global warming, say scientists
>
> Leading scientists have dismissed studies
Dismissed? Real scientists do not dismiss.
which say that global
> warming is a natural phenomenon connected with sunspots, rather than
> the result of the man-made emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2).
>
> According to a report in The Independent, the researchers, all experts
> in climate or solar science,
Experts my ass.
said that the scientific evidence
> continually cited by skeptics to promote the idea of sunspots being
> the cause of global warming is deeply flawed.
But, strangely, they can't seem to describe the flaws.
>
> Studies published in 1991 and 1998 claimed to establish a link between
> global temperatures and solar activity – sunspots – and continue to be
> cited by climate skeptics.
>
> However, problems with the data used to establish the correlation have
> been identified by other experts
Surely you don't expect us to take their word on this. Do you?
and the flaws are now widely accepted
> by the scientific community, even though the studies continue to be
> used to support the idea that global warming is “natural”.
>
> The issue has gained new importance in the light of opinion polls
> showing that nearly one in two people now believe global warming is a
> natural phenomenon unconnected with CO2 emissions.
>
> Powerful support for this idea came in 1991 when Eigil
> Friis-Christensen, director of the Danish National Space Centre,
> published a study showing a remarkable correlation between global
> warming and the length of sunspot cycles.
>
> A further study published in 1998 by Friis-Christensen and his
> colleague Henrik Svensmark suggested a possible explanation for the
> warming trend with a link between solar activity, cosmic rays and the
> formation of clouds.
>
> However, many scientists now believe both of these studies are
> seriously flawed,
Why? Where are the details. Real scientists discuss details.
Pretend scientists pontificate. All I'm seeing here is pontification.
and that when errors introduced into the analysis
> are removed, the correlations disappear, with no link between sunspots
> and global warming.
>
> According to Peter Laut, a former adviser to the Danish Energy Agency
> who first identified the flaws, there were practically no observations
> to support the idea that variations in sunspots played more than a
> minor role in global warming.
Obviously he is voting this way because he knows his paycheck depends
on it.
>
> Laut’s analysis of the flaws is accepted by most scientists familiar
> with the research,
But, strangely, none of them are willing to discuss the details.
including Paul Crutzen, an atmospheric chemist at
> the Max Planck Institute in Germany, who won a Nobel Prize for his
> work on understanding the hole in the ozone layer.
>
> “There is definitely a problem (with these studies). Laut has really
> pinned it down but the (sunspot) argument keeps reappearing and its
> quite irritating.” Professor Crutzen said.
>
> “I’ve looked into this quite closely and I’m on Laut’s side in terms
> of his analysis of the data,” said Professor Stefan Rahsmstorf, of
> Potsdam University. (ANI)
Consensus science isn't science.
Buerste
"Claudius Denk" <claudi...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:cf23b6a5-0d7f-4847...@s21g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
<snip>
>Dismissed? Real scientists do not dismiss.
"REAL SCIENTISTS" don't cook and delete data. You cooked the data, you got
caught, you lose.