I can hear it now...

[The Dude]

Climate variability - Yes, the climate changes over time, yes it has devastating effects, no there is not much we could ever expect to do about it.

 

Climate change - The effect man has on the climate.

 

 

 

Just because the first is true, doesn't make the second one false.

 

Just because man has an effect on the climate does not mean "ZZZOMG MAN WILL DIE!!!!" which is the tenor of every single report you hear about climate change. I have yet to see a single report showing that an increase in base temps could possibly be beneficial to mankind.

 

It is impossible that every single climate model shows "disaster" via an overall warmer planet. Yet I have seen none in any major news report... ever. That's a too much Chicken Little for me.

 

You seem to be hung up on the base temps. The rate at which we're causing it to change is what we have to worry about. Our infrastructures and ecosystems are suited to particular weather patterns and sea levels. It's not very reasonable to think that rapid change would somehow be beneficial.

WE control the sun?

 

Human activity is puny compared to the sun. Sure it doesn't help, but it is only a TINY fraction of the total fraction.

 

A co-worker asked me, "You don't think all the cars in KC isn't doing anything?"

I said "But that is cancelled by all the cars that don't exist between Honolulu and LA"

Except there has been no increase in solar radiation for as long as we've been keeping track (since 1978).

 

http://www.pmodwrc.c...e/SolarConstant

 

 

 

Another fun fact, all those ships in the ocean between Honolulu and LA are responsible for a much, much, much more carbon emissions than all the cars in Kansas City. Much more.

 

http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4015

[carlfense]

The scientific consensus seems at odds with the huskerboard consensus. Interesting.

[knapplc]

The scientific consensus seems at odds with the huskerboard consensus. Interesting.

 

I don't think we can draw a group conclusion from the discussion in this thread. Seems like many disparate views.

[carlfense]

I don't think we can draw a group conclusion from the discussion in this thread. Seems like many disparate views.

We could add a poll.

[iLoveLamp]

Climate variability - Yes, the climate changes over time, yes it has devastating effects, no there is not much we could ever expect to do about it.

 

Climate change - The effect man has on the climate.

 

 

 

Just because the first is true, doesn't make the second one false.

 

Just because man has an effect on the climate does not mean "ZZZOMG MAN WILL DIE!!!!" which is the tenor of every single report you hear about climate change. I have yet to see a single report showing that an increase in base temps could possibly be beneficial to mankind.

 

It is impossible that every single climate model shows "disaster" via an overall warmer planet. Yet I have seen none in any major news report... ever. That's a too much Chicken Little for me.

 

You seem to be hung up on the base temps. The rate at which we're causing it to change is what we have to worry about. Our infrastructures and ecosystems are suited to particular weather patterns and sea levels. It's not very reasonable to think that rapid change would somehow be beneficial.

WE control the sun?

 

Human activity is puny compared to the sun. Sure it doesn't help, but it is only a TINY fraction of the total fraction.

 

A co-worker asked me, "You don't think all the cars in KC isn't doing anything?"

I said "But that is cancelled by all the cars that don't exist between Honolulu and LA"

 

The sum of energy emitted by the Sun—the total solar irradiance (TSI)—varies by only about 0.1% from the solar cycle’s peak to valley. This corresponds to a temperature effect on the order of 0.1°C (0.18°F), as noted by solar expert Judith Lean (Naval Research Laboratory), making it a relatively small factor compared to El Niño and La Niña as well as global warming. It’s worth noting that Earth tied its highest temperature record in 2010 even as the Sun was struggling to emerge from its deepest and longest minimum in a century (as measured by sunspots).

 

The modest climate effect of this drop was confirmed in modeling for a 2010 paper in Geophysical Research Letters by Georg Fulner and Stefan Ramstorf (Potsdam Institute for Climate Change Research). They used a Potsdam model to simulate climate to the year 2100 in two different scenarios: one in which the last 11-year cycle repeats through the century, and one in which the Sun enters a new grand minimum. Using generous TSI drops of 0.08% and 0.25% respectively, they came up with global temperature dips of around 0.10°C and 0.26°C (0.18°F to 0.47°F). Even the latter drop pales next to the temperature rise of 3°C or more (5.4°F or more) that's expected by 2100 due to human-produced greenhouse gases.

 

Mark Miesch, a solar physicist at NCAR’s High Altitude Observatory says that “The Sun has both predictable and naturally chaotic behavior”. He thinks it’s plausible that the Sun could see a series of lower-amplitude cycles in coming decades, with valleys as deep as 2008–09 and only modest peaks. There’s also the slim chance of a “grand minimum,” a multidecadal period in which sunspot activity drops greatly. Two examples are the Dalton Minimum (1795–1825) and the more extreme Maunder Minimum (1645–1715). The latter occurred in the midst of the Little Ice Age, a fact that helped stoke current media speculation about what a future grand minimum might do.

 

If there’s a wild card here, it’s the effect of ultraviolet rays. The Sun’s UV output varies much more sharply than its total output, rising and falling by as much as 50% within a solar cycle. There are signs that UV can influence weather and climate by interacting with stratospheric ozone and shaping circulation patterns. (Some researchers have also looked into how cloud formation might be affected by cosmic rays, which are modulated by the Sun’s UV, but any such impacts remain unclear.)

 

That caveat aside, it looks as if a future Maunder-sized grand minimum—uncertain as it is—would fall well short of counteracting human-induced climate change. Tempting as it is to look to the highly visible Sun, it’s the invisible threat of greenhouse gases that looms larger in our climatic future.

 

You can see a total output of TSI below:

 

Here's the link, I'm not taking credit for writing this myself:

https://www2.ucar.ed...arming#TSIgraph

[carlfense]

Ah, the Maunder Minimum. #WesternCivFlashback