Science Channel - The Sun causes global warming (maybe)

[RichardR]

Did anyone else catch the "Climate Conflict" program on The Science Channel last night? I thought it did a pretty good job of explaining conflicting theories on global warming, in particular Henrik Svensmark's data showing that changes in the Sun's magnetic field correlates to Earth temperatures, and his theories about how the Sun's magnetic field affects cloud formation on Earth.

The program will be shown again. Times here:

 

[Fade]

Interesting.

The global warming debate has always been intriguing to me.

My gut says that it's all too plausible, but the research doesn't really tell me either way. So, I have to sit here on the fence wondering what breakthrough is coming next. I'd like the final answer to this question.

 

[pupdog]

Modeling of climate has required input of anthropogenic effects (eg industrial CO2) in order get a better match to observed climate change. If this solar factor can be added to the model, it could possibly improve the results.

 

[Diamond]

Modeling of climate has required input of anthropogenic effects (eg industrial CO2) in order get a better match to observed climate change. If this solar factor can be added to the model, it could possibly improve the results.

How can it improve the result of something when it ignores all the major drivers of climate on earth?

The solar factor is not simply a co-factor with CO2. It is THE major driver of the earth's atmosphere/ocean system.

What computer modelling has generated is that large amounts of money can be wasted trying to predict the unpredictable by frightening people with scary results which don't match reality.

 

[Jon_in_london]

The sun causes global warming?

[sarcasm]
No! say it isnt so! I had noticed this though... at night when the sun is down it tends to be colder whilst suring the day when the sun is shining it tends to be hot!! Amazing!!!
[/sarcasm]

 

[pupdog]

From Diamond:

What computer modelling has generated is that large amounts of money can be wasted trying to predict the unpredictable by frightening people with scary results which don't match reality.

Perhaps my statement wasn't clear enough, so I suggest you refer to Stott & al., "External Control of 20th Century Temperature by Natural and Anthropogenic Forcings" in Science, 15 December 2000. Their model DID simulate reality fairly well, but it did better when a suite of anthropogenic factors was included. And of course, it DID include the major factors (natural factors, including specifically solar irradiance).

 

[tracer]

Is "solar irradiance" the opposite of "solar radiance"?