You Can't Tax the Sun for Shining
So They Keep the Focus on You and Me
A new paper has been published which claims that the Sun cannot be implicated in the past 20 years of global warming. As expected, the usual suspects have lined up to proclaim the death of the Solar link to global warming and that the 'science is settled', despite the fact that the 2007 SPM of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fourth Assessment Report rates the level of scientific understanding of solar irradiance as 'low' and other solar factors such as eruptive cycles as 'very low'.
Bizarrely, one of the authors admits that the ecomyth-busting Wag TV documentary 'The Great Global Warming Swindle' was part of the reason for writing the paper.
The paper confirms that there is considerable evidence for solar influence on Earth's pre-industrial climate. It also concedes that it was an influence for the first half of the 20th Century, up to 1985, and that "solar radiative forcing variations were amplified by some mechanism that is, as yet, unknown". Yet, this unknown factor is dismissed as being irrelevant. There is also some support for the ABD prediction that solar activity is heading for a fall: "mean values will decline over the next century. This would reduce the solar forcing of climate..." The solar eruptivity/cosmic ray/cloud formation link to climate change is dismissed without being discussed in detail, yet the co-author Claus Frohlich works at CERN, in Switzerland, where the cosmic ray/cloud experiment isn't due to be completed until 2010.
ABD environment spokesman Ben Adams said,
"Once again we hear claims that the science is settled despite overwhelming evidence suggesting otherwise. The claimed 0.4C warming from 1985 includes a temperature boost from the natural phenomenon known as El Nino in 1998, concerns over a warm bias in the near surface temperature data, and the possible effect of land use changes. There's also the issue of how tropospheric amplification (warming), predicted by computer climate models, is still AWOL.
Yet, on the basis of a PR statement drawn from incomplete research, we're all expected to give up our cars and our freedom of mobility, and hand over more of our already heavily taxed income to profligate politicians who will — allegedly — save the planet by wasting money and energy on projects related to re-election or pop culture rather than mitigation of climate change impacts. If the UK's carbon emissions stopped overnight, which eco-extremists would like to see, we would undergo economic collapse and regression to a localised medieval lifestyle while watching China make up the deficit in 700 days involving coal fired power stations built using subsidies from the UK government (Hansard 7th November 2002) as part of a package totalling more than £1.5 billion. You couldn't make this stuff up."