Sun Heating up Earth

[piasabird]

Researchers in the UK came to a conclusion that the sun even though it was putting out less energy and less sunflare activity, was putting out stronger short wave length radiation and it was significantly heating up the earth causing global warming.

Their source of data is NASA.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/10/07/solar_as_big_as_people/

Note: I am not against reducing pollution.

"New data indicates that changes in the Sun's output of energy were a major factor in the global temperature increases seen in recent years. The research will be unwelcome among hardcore green activists, as it downplays the influence of human-driven carbon emissions."

 

[GoPackGo]

Those with reason in their brain this is a big "DUH!!!"

I consider myself a bit of a conservative and I drive a Prius, have a high efficiency HVAC system in my house and use CFL bulbs until the LEDs become cheaper.

 

[PeshakJang]

Only one solution... tax sunlight. The debate is over.

 

[her209]

"It does require verification, but our findings could be too important to not publish them now," she told hefty boffinry mag Nature, which published the new research. The prof considers that increased sun-powered warming probably had as much effect on global temperature as carbon during the period of her study.

 

[JSt0rm]

Global warming: Solved!

 

[DaveSimmons]

I thought the denier propaganda was that climate change wasn't happening at all.

The prof considers that increased sun-powered warming probably had as much effect on global temperature as carbon during the period of her study.

Haigh thinks, however, that while recent temperature rises may well have been down to the Sun as much as anything humanity has done, over long periods of time solar warming probably has little effect on the Earth's temperature one way or the other, as solar activity cycles up and down regularly.

That's still saying short-term climate change is half man-made, and long-term is more us than sol.

 

[Throckmorton]

Bullshit article from a tabloid.
Did you notice this part?
the Sun was putting out less energy overall than usual

The whole point of the greenhouse effect is that energy hitting the earth is converted to the black body wavelengths that get trapped by greenhouse gases.

Even more important--- note that the article doesn't mention a time frame at all. One of the comments mentions that the study is from 2004-2007. In what universe is 3 years the same as a century?

 

[Throckmorton]

Ah yes, another example of a gullible buffoon believing a slanted and misleading article because it supports his politically grounded wishes and beliefs.

Here's a real article on the same study:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-11480916

"If you could extrapolate... the climate models have been
over-estimating the Sun's effect on temperature [rise]."

 

[Udgnim]

I am in shock

who would have thought the Sun has a significant influence on global temperatures

 

[PeshakJang]

Ah yes, another example of a gullible buffoon believing a slanted and misleading article because it supports his politically grounded wishes and beliefs.

Here's a real article on the same study:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-11480916

"If you could extrapolate... the climate models have been
over-estimating the Sun's effect on temperature [rise]."

From your link

"It's now emerging that the 'space age' has been a grand maximum; so my view is that the Sun is due to fall out of this and into a 'grand minimum', so I would not be surprised if in 50 years' time we find ourselves in conditions like the 'Maunder Minimum' [of the late 17th and early 18th Centuries] associated with the 'Little Ice Age'."

So I guess we better start pumping more CO2 out to stave off this ice-age... I doubt we would be better off than if the temps went up 1 degree in the next 500 years.

 

[Throckmorton]

From your link



So I guess we better start pumping more CO2 out to stave off this ice-age... I doubt we would be better off than if the temps went up 1 degree in the next 500 years.

Yes, the global warming climate engineering experiment might turn out to be beneficial on the 100-1000 year time scale

 

[drebo]

Yes, the global warming climate engineering experiment might turn out to be beneficial on the 100-1000 year time scale

Or people might come to realize that we can't control the climate, one way or the other.

I'd prefer not to spend trillions and trillions of tax dollars finding that generally accepted fact out, though.

 

[dainthomas]

Even more important--- note that the article doesn't mention a time frame at all. One of the comments mentions that the study is from 2004-2007. In what universe is 3 years the same as a century?

The same one where a century equals several thousand years.

I thought the denier propaganda was that climate change wasn't happening at all.

Nice try. The debate is about man-made global warming.

Only one solution... tax sunlight. The debate is over.

Rofl! The science is settled!

 

[Narmer]

Here is another interesting theory I postulated here 7 months ago.
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2060213&highlight=magnetic+field

 

[Throckmorton]

Or people might come to realize that we can't control the climate, one way or the other.

I'd prefer not to spend trillions and trillions of tax dollars finding that generally accepted fact out, though.

Of course we can change the climate. Are you that naive?

 

[Throckmorton]

The same one where a century equals several thousand years.



Nice try. The debate is about man-made global warming.



Rofl! The science is settled!

I don't know what you're referring to with the several thousand years thing.

Deniers used to say that there's no such thing as global warming. Every winter they repeat that crap when there's a blizzard...
During other seasons they claim that the greenhouse gases we've put into the atmosphere aren't the cause of the current warming, even though retaining heat is simply one of their physical properties! And of course they can't come up with any other explanation of the current warming--- the sun is NOT it, as this study makes clear.

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

All the pavement in the US woulkd cover texas. What does black do? Absorb or reflect heat?

 

[HumblePie]

Bullshit article from a tabloid.
Did you notice this part?
the Sun was putting out less energy overall than usual

The whole point of the greenhouse effect is that energy hitting the earth is converted to the black body wavelengths that get trapped by greenhouse gases.

Even more important--- note that the article doesn't mention a time frame at all. One of the comments mentions that the study is from 2004-2007. In what universe is 3 years the same as a century?

Throck.. here is something you missed.

The sun puts out a vast array of different types of energy. MOST of that energy never reaches the surface of the planet. Our Ionosphere, magnetics, and other even the green houses gases reflect and/or deflect much back out into space. If all the energy was to reach our planet, we'd all be fried right now. That is a fact.

What this article is point out is that while other spectrums of energy output from the sun decreased, the short wave spectrums INCREASED. The shortwave spectrum gets through the majority of the "protection" that surrounds our planet.

Think of it like this for an analogy.

The sun emits energy 1000 units X and energy 1000 units Y. The planet blocks 950 units of X and only 50 units of Y. Total energy through is 1000 units of both X and Y.

Total output from sun = 2000 units
Total received by planet = 1000 units

The sun changes it's energy output and not it is doing way less of X at 500 units, and a little more of Y at 1300 units. Now only 25 Units of X get through but 1,235 unit of Y get through.

Total output from sun = 1800 units
Total received by planet = 1,260 units

Which means that less from the sun in TOTAL energy was put out, but the planet still received more energy because it is less protected versus that type of energy.


That was the point that flew right over your head.

And yes, if more of the energy gets through, more will be contained by any additional gases that prevent it from being released back into space.

 

[Paratus]

Lots of arm chair climate scientists in this thread.

Guess what contrary to some of our faith based armchair scientists in this thread, real climate scientists DO take into account solar output, heat island effects, water vapor and methane cocnentrations in addition to CO2.

Quite frankly if the article is correct that the sun is effectively heating us more than was expected that's a very bad thing considering the excess CO2 in the atmosphere.

Models and theories change with new data. That's how science works.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

The whole point of the greenhouse effect is that energy hitting the earth is converted to the black body wavelengths that get trapped by greenhouse gases.

I'm not sure what the relative contribution of global warming come from our releasing CO2 and other gasses into the atmosphere, but you really ought to brush up on your physics.

Can you clarify "Gets converted to blackbody wavelengths?" What is the range in NM where radiation is "blackbody" and then when it isn't? You think that x-ray emissions are equivalent to infrared when it comes to heating? That the electromagnetic spectrum is equally transmitted and reflected by the atmosphere?

It's probably better if you sit this one out.

 

[Paratus]

I'm not sure what the relative contribution of global warming come from our releasing CO2 and other gasses into the atmosphere, but you really ought to brush up on your physics.

Can you clarify "Gets converted to blackbody wavelengths?" What is the range in NM where radiation is "blackbody" and then when it isn't? You think that x-ray emissions are equivalent to infrared when it comes to heating? That the electromagnetic spectrum is equally transmitted and reflected by the atmosphere?

It's probably better if you sit this one out.

Well if I remember correctly it's infra-red that get's re-radiated and trapped by the CO2 in the atmosphere. And as I pointed out in the other thread we know the Earth is absorbing about 1W/m^2 more than it emits so there will be more energy in the system to drive weather systmes, and heatup the oceans.

 

[Throckmorton]

Throck.. here is something you missed.

The sun puts out a vast array of different types of energy. MOST of that energy never reaches the surface of the planet. Our Ionosphere, magnetics, and other even the green houses gases reflect and/or deflect much back out into space. If all the energy was to reach our planet, we'd all be fried right now. That is a fact.

What this article is point out is that while other spectrums of energy output from the sun decreased, the short wave spectrums INCREASED. The shortwave spectrum gets through the majority of the "protection" that surrounds our planet.

Think of it like this for an analogy.

The sun emits energy 1000 units X and energy 1000 units Y. The planet blocks 950 units of X and only 50 units of Y. Total energy through is 1000 units of both X and Y.

Total output from sun = 2000 units
Total received by planet = 1000 units

The sun changes it's energy output and not it is doing way less of X at 500 units, and a little more of Y at 1300 units. Now only 25 Units of X get through but 1,235 unit of Y get through.

Total output from sun = 1800 units
Total received by planet = 1,260 units

Which means that less from the sun in TOTAL energy was put out, but the planet still received more energy because it is less protected versus that type of energy.


That was the point that flew right over your head.

And yes, if more of the energy gets through, more will be contained by any additional gases that prevent it from being released back into space.

Yeah I missed that part until I read more.

But the fact remains that it's not enough of an increase in energy getting through to the ground to explain the warming we've experienced. It says that in the BBC article, and the OP's article left that out because it doesn't fit the author's agenda.

 

[Throckmorton]

I'm not sure what the relative contribution of global warming come from our releasing CO2 and other gasses into the atmosphere, but you really ought to brush up on your physics.

Can you clarify "Gets converted to blackbody wavelengths?" What is the range in NM where radiation is "blackbody" and then when it isn't? You think that x-ray emissions are equivalent to infrared when it comes to heating? That the electromagnetic spectrum is equally transmitted and reflected by the atmosphere?

It's probably better if you sit this one out.

The radiation hits the ground and ocean and heats them up, and infrared wavelengths are radiated back out. What are you disputing?

 

[silverpig]

It was published in Nature, the end-all-be-all of scientific publications. Rest assured, it got some MAJOR peer review before getting through the Nature door.

 

[silverpig]

Ah yes, another example of a gullible buffoon believing a slanted and misleading article because it supports his politically grounded wishes and beliefs.

Here's a real article on the same study:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-11480916

"If you could extrapolate... the climate models have been
over-estimating the Sun's effect on temperature [rise]."

At least link to the bloody paper.