Solar Deniers Attempt to Eclipse Global Warming Documentary

Marc Sheppard
On the very day before the British documentary The Great Global Warming Swindle is to hit Aussie TV screens, the Royal Society has published the work of 2 scientists who claim to have disproved its core position - that the actions of the sun, not humans, cause global warming.  And, unlike the countless studies which support solar forcing theories, this one you most definitely WILL be hearing about from the mainstream media.

Following a week of press leaks, Mike Lockwood and Claus Fröhlich have submitted a paper to Proceedings of the Royal Society A, which admits that:
"There is considerable evidence for solar influence on the Earth's pre-industrial climate and the Sun may well have been a factor in post-industrial climate change in the first half of the last century."
However, observe they, the sun's magnetic field has declined since 1985, even as the world heats up.  It is the "rapid rise in global mean temperatures" during this 22 year period ALONE which they claim "cannot be ascribed to solar variability."

Imagine that-- less than a quarter of a century? Even though old Sol has been bombarding us with its warming rays for over 4.5 billion years and clear Sun/Climate correlations have been observed spanning millennia.

Of course, it will take a little time for fellow scientists to absorb, analyze and respond to their 14 page report, right?  Well, not quite - particularly when there's a pesky contrarian opinion about to be broadcast to a new continent of potential Gore-bots the very next day.

So, faster than you can say "Solar Resonant Diffusion Waves," University of Melbourne climate scientist David Karoly smugly blurted out that [emphasis added]:
"These findings completely refute the allegations made by some pseudo-scientists that all recent global warming is due to solar effects."
Incidentally, Dr. Karoly will be joining a panel arguing the assertions of the documentary immediately following its broadcast on Australia's ABC Thursday night. Any guesses which side the longtime IPCC contributor might be taking?

And Stefan Rahmstorf, who once referred to awful The Day After Tomorrow scriptwriter Jeffrey Nachmanoff as "well-informed about the science and politics of global climate change," didn't let any ice melt under his feet either.  The ever-alarmed climate scientist from the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany claimed an immediate, albeit macabre, victory:
"This paper is the final nail in the coffin for people who would like to make the sun responsible for present global warming"
Ouch -- final nail in the coffin?  Sure, enviro-mental-case Robert F. Kennedy Jr. recently referred to AGW skeptics as traitors, but do he and his fellow alarmists really want us all stood up against a wall and offered a last big-bad-industry-pushed cancer-causing smoke? 
Meanwhile, right on cue and despite the fact that these were the freshly published opinions of but 2 men (enough for a consensus?), eager Greenhouse Gas passers set to work on triumphant headlines, exemplified by:
Not surprisingly, little such fanfare was awarded last month's fine work by noted Paleoclimatologist R. Timothy Patterson or the myriad others that tell the exact opposite story.  But then, why would there be? The sheer simplicity of solar impact makes it public enemy number one to the scare-mongers. 

Last weekend's dismal Live Earth concerts were yet another attempt to forward the green agenda and silence dissent - this time with thunderous overture, silly mantras put to driving beats, and flash-in-the-pan special effects.  

Now it seems they fear the truth that one well-made documentary might convey and, therefore, feel the need to squash it with more pageantry.  How pathetic.

Nevertheless, while tomorrow is sure to bring a world of reasoned retort, I would wager a case of sun-screen that the real hysteria over this paper hasn't yet begun.

On the very day before the British documentary The Great Global Warming Swindle is to hit Aussie TV screens, the Royal Society has published the work of 2 scientists who claim to have disproved its core position - that the actions of the sun, not humans, cause global warming.  And, unlike the countless studies which support solar forcing theories, this one you most definitely WILL be hearing about from the mainstream media.

Following a week of press leaks, Mike Lockwood and Claus Fröhlich have submitted a paper to Proceedings of the Royal Society A, which admits that:
"There is considerable evidence for solar influence on the Earth's pre-industrial climate and the Sun may well have been a factor in post-industrial climate change in the first half of the last century."
However, observe they, the sun's magnetic field has declined since 1985, even as the world heats up.  It is the "rapid rise in global mean temperatures" during this 22 year period ALONE which they claim "cannot be ascribed to solar variability."

Imagine that-- less than a quarter of a century? Even though old Sol has been bombarding us with its warming rays for over 4.5 billion years and clear Sun/Climate correlations have been observed spanning millennia.

Of course, it will take a little time for fellow scientists to absorb, analyze and respond to their 14 page report, right?  Well, not quite - particularly when there's a pesky contrarian opinion about to be broadcast to a new continent of potential Gore-bots the very next day.

So, faster than you can say "Solar Resonant Diffusion Waves," University of Melbourne climate scientist David Karoly smugly blurted out that [emphasis added]:
"These findings completely refute the allegations made by some pseudo-scientists that all recent global warming is due to solar effects."
Incidentally, Dr. Karoly will be joining a panel arguing the assertions of the documentary immediately following its broadcast on Australia's ABC Thursday night. Any guesses which side the longtime IPCC contributor might be taking?

And Stefan Rahmstorf, who once referred to awful The Day After Tomorrow scriptwriter Jeffrey Nachmanoff as "well-informed about the science and politics of global climate change," didn't let any ice melt under his feet either.  The ever-alarmed climate scientist from the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany claimed an immediate, albeit macabre, victory:
"This paper is the final nail in the coffin for people who would like to make the sun responsible for present global warming"
Ouch -- final nail in the coffin?  Sure, enviro-mental-case Robert F. Kennedy Jr. recently referred to AGW skeptics as traitors, but do he and his fellow alarmists really want us all stood up against a wall and offered a last big-bad-industry-pushed cancer-causing smoke? 
Meanwhile, right on cue and despite the fact that these were the freshly published opinions of but 2 men (enough for a consensus?), eager Greenhouse Gas passers set to work on triumphant headlines, exemplified by:
Not surprisingly, little such fanfare was awarded last month's fine work by noted Paleoclimatologist R. Timothy Patterson or the myriad others that tell the exact opposite story.  But then, why would there be? The sheer simplicity of solar impact makes it public enemy number one to the scare-mongers. 

Last weekend's dismal Live Earth concerts were yet another attempt to forward the green agenda and silence dissent - this time with thunderous overture, silly mantras put to driving beats, and flash-in-the-pan special effects.  

Now it seems they fear the truth that one well-made documentary might convey and, therefore, feel the need to squash it with more pageantry.  How pathetic.

Nevertheless, while tomorrow is sure to bring a world of reasoned retort, I would wager a case of sun-screen that the real hysteria over this paper hasn't yet begun.