From: James Rogers (jamesr@best.com)
Date: Tue Nov 20 2001 - 10:52:05 MST
On 11/20/01 9:21 AM, "Harvey Newstrom" <mail@HarveyNewstrom.com> wrote:
>
> Contrary to first appearances, this may actually be used to help support the
> global-warming theory. This analysis not only showed the 1/10% variation in
> sunlight, but also showed that there has not been any larger variation than
> that for the past 12,000 years. This means that sun cycles do not account
> for global warming more than 1/10% variation. Other causative factors must
> be at work to explain changes in global climate.
This doesn't follow. A 0.1% variation in solar flux can have a much larger
than 0.1% variation impact on global warming. In fact, I recall a number of
studies suggesting that very minor variations in solar flux have a fairly
dramatic impact on global climate. While I would agree that other factors
are probably important in climate change, I think it would be foolish to
dismiss solar flux variation as a driving factor. It is a chaotic system,
and many of the other theorized factors in global warming also rely on minor
variations generating massive changes.
-James Rogers
jamesr@best.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:12:03 MST