http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0031018207005214 " Abstract Long-term climatic changes related to solar forcing were examined using millennium-scale palaeoclimatic reconstructions from the Central Asian mountain region, i.e. summer temperature records for the Tien Shan mountains and precipitation records for the Tibetan Plateau. The reconstructions were based on juniper tree-ring width records, i.e. Juniperus turkestanica for the Tien Shan and Sabina przewalskii for the Tibetan Plateau. The data were processed using spectral and wavelet analysis and filtered in the frequency range related to major solar activity periodicities. The results obtained for various tree-ring chronologies indicate palaeoclimatic oscillations in the range of the de Vries (∼ 210-year) solar cycles through the last millennium. The quasi-200-year variations revealed in the palaeoclimatic reconstructions correlate well (R2 = 0.58–0.94) with solar activity variations (Δ14C variations). The quasi-200-year climatic variations have also been detected in climate-linked processes in Asia, Europe, North and South America, Australia, and the Arctic and Antarctica. The results obtained point to a pronounced influence of solar activity on global climatic processes. Analysis has shown that climate response to the long-term global solar forcing has a regional character. An appreciable delay in the climate response to the solar signal can occur (up to 150 years). In addition, the sign of the climate response can differ from the solar signal sign. The climate response to long-term solar activity variations (from 10s to 1000s years) manifests itself in different climatic parameters, such as temperature, precipitation and atmospheric and oceanic circulation. The climate response to the de Vries cycle has been found to occur not only during the last millennia but also in earlier epochs, up to hundreds of millions years ago."
you mean the sun a big "forcing" on climate... why didn't the nutters look at the sun? we have posted dozens of recent papers like this and yet fraudcurrents will imply its all man made co2... yet produce no evidence.
FC, what's the point? If these guys had to live on a houseboat because of rising sea levels and their hair caught on fire from the warming, they'd still deny it.
Yes, it is all man made greenhouse gasses. http://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2015-whats-warming-the-world/
Well great, now we broke the sun... let's find a way to blame this on the skeptics... Is a mini ICE AGE on the way? Scientists warn the sun will 'go to sleep' in 2030 and could cause temperatures to plummet New study claims to have cracked predicting solar cycles Says that between 2030 and 2040 solar cycles will cancel each other out Could lead to 'Maunder minimum' effect that saw River Thames freeze over http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...un-sleep-2020-cause-temperatures-plummet.html
it's not the skeptics they want to blame it on, it's the capitalists. Global warming is just another arrow in the the quiver of the communists. It doesn't matter what we do, according to them it is wrong. If we started making a lot of money from solar power they would be against it. They don't give a shit about science or the environment. All they know is we have money and they want it.
Of all those charts, they hang their hat on the one showing a rise in CO2, naturally, but we all know that CO2 LAGS temperature, it does not lead it. It's laughable they posted this as a serious counter to the AGW skeptics arguments. The other thing I noticed is their data for establishing divergence from the base line (anomolies) is only 30 years...1880-1910. That seems an awful short period to use as a base, especially when you're talking about global climate. None of what they posted "proves" anything other than that we are in a warming pattern, a pattern that has repeated for thousands of years. One other thing. Look closely at the charts. They all run temp data past 2005, but the other data only goes 2005. Why? And finally, their temp data is rolling over, its not making new highs. The temps are lower now than they were in 2005.
CO2 leads temperature when it's levels increase by 40% because we are releasing 9 billion tons per year into the atmosphere. Does the idiot righty know why? Well let me tell you. CO2 IS A STRONG GREENHOUSE GAS YOU FUCKING MORON!!!!!!!! Please get a fucking clue and then get back to us. K? Holy shit you righties are stupid.