Jan. 8, 2013: In the galactic scheme of things, the Sun is a remarkably constant star. While some stars exhibit dramatic pulsations, wildly yo-yoing in size and brightness, and sometimes even exploding, the luminosity of our own sun varies a measly 0.1% over the course of the 11-year solar cycle.
There is, however, a dawning realization among researchers that even these apparently tiny variations can have a significant effect on terrestrial climate. A new report issued by the National Research Council (NRC), “The Effects of Solar Variability on Earth’s Climate,” lays out some of the surprisingly complex ways that solar activity can make itself felt on our planet.
NASA has almost caught up with the state of climate science in the 18th century.
h/t to Tom Nelson
They seldom see the Sun from their usual position of rectal defilade.
Never
A
Straight
Answer!
The climaterealists site addressed this 2 weeks ago, I believe, to which I responded with a reminder for simplicity of hypotheses, instead of those “complex ways” being theorized by the incompetent consensus academics:
Solar (UV) Variation and Terrestrial Climate
Of course, the main point climate debaters of every stripe need to learn, once and for all, from my definitive Venus/Earth analysis, is that the troposphere is warmed by direct absorption of incident solar (IR) radiation, not from the ground. Ground heating (uneven heating of the surface, note) just drives the weather around the world, it doesn’t heat the atmosphere, globally.
The warmists have always willfully and obtusely dwelt on total solar radiation (TSI) as the only solar factor that would possibly influence the earth’s climate. Swept under the table are the much more variable factors such as UV and solar wind.
I once asked a global warming greenpeacer in denver how big the sun was compared to the earth. His response was, “I don’t know and I don’t know why I would want to know.” Wish I had those 2 minutes back.
18th century science? Neanderthals had necks that allowed for tilting the head back, and they discovered a heating element above. And recognized its significance enough to track it across the sky, without ever concerning themselves with farts and burps.
They should read:
Using the Oceans as a Calorimeter to Quantify the Solar Radiative Forcing
Nir J. Shaviv
Abstract.
Over the 11-year solar cycle, small changes in the total solar irradiance (TSI) give rise
to small variations in the global energy budget. It was suggested, however, that different
mechanisms could amplify solar activity variations to give large climatic effects, a
possibility which is still a subject of debate. With this in mind, we use the oceans as
a calorimeter to measure the radiative forcing variations associated with the solar cycle.
This is achieved through the study of three independent records, the net heat flux
into the oceans over 5 decades, the sea level change rate based on tide gauge records over
the 20th century, and the sea surface temperature variations. Each of the records can
be used to consistently derive the same oceanic heat flux. We find that the total radiative
forcing associated with solar cycles variations is about 5 to 7 times larger than just
those associated with the TSI variations, thus implying the necessary existence of an amplification
mechanism, though without pointing to which one.
http://www.sciencebits.com/files/articles/CalorimeterFinal.pdf
Of course they won’t read it – but they should do.
So does this mean they’re also close to discovering why it gets cold and dark at night? I can’t believe so many millions have actually fallen for this AGW sham.