3 ms·

Solar cycle is to hotter sun like climate change is to global warming. Not a perfect analogy, but helps with the gist.

defrost 3y ago
Worth noting that, according to NASA: Do scientists think that changes in solar irradiance due to the 11-year solar cycle could be strong enough to cause the current change being measured in Earth's climate? In a word, no. Scientists agree that the solar cycle and its associated short-term changes in irradiance cannot be the main force driving the changes in Earth's climate we are currently seeing. For one thing, the Sun's energy output only changes by up to 0.15% over the course of the cycle, less than what would be needed to force the change in climate that we see. Also, scientists have not been able to find convincing evidence that the 11-yr cycle is mirrored in any aspects of the climate beyond the stratosphere – such as surface temperature, rainfall or wind patterns. https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/sunearth/solar-events-news/Does-the-Solar-Cycle-Affect-Earths-Climate.html https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/sunearth/solar-events-new... The cycle is a regular small flucuation in total energy with relatively little change in the part of the spectrum that comes all the way through the atmosphere to heat up the land and water .. ibcreasing insulation trapping that heat has been the driver of climate change here. If you read the linked article or any related science article the focus is on the geomagnetic surges caused by the changes in the suns field.
- blindriver 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - GeoAtreides 3y ago
    Man, do I have good news for you! You don't have to wait, we're already tracking temperature vs solar activity: https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/189/graphic-temperature-vs-solar-activity/ https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/189/graphic-tempe...
    - blindriver 3y ago
      That "solar activity" graph completely contradicts the graph in the article. I'll wait for better data.
      - ben_w 3y ago
        Given the graph starts in 1880: I see you, like myself, are anticipating substantial life extension technology.
      - GeoAtreides 3y ago
        Ah, you're a tricky client! The article has a graph of sunspot numbers, not irradiance! So nothing contradicts anything, but that's not really important! We also have graphs of sun activity vs temperature! http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/thermo/solact.html http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/thermo/solact.htm... But wait! There's more! Here is a graph of sunspot numbers since 1880: https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/couldnt-sun-be-cause-global-warming https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/couldnt-sun... It doesn't feature the global temperature, so it's not perfect, we're sorry! We're very sorry! But it's clearly constant and doesn't exhibit the hockey stick shape of global temperature.
      - cashsterling 3y ago
        Lol... they match up fine for solar activity from 2012 to 2020. This sounds like: "the data doesn't support my thesis so I'll wait for 'better' data. What does 'better data' mean? Data that supports my thesis... thank you very much."
    - wredue 3y ago
      Time to cancel NASA!
  - newZWhoDis 3y ago
    >If scientists said that there was a correlation between temperature and Sun activity, they would be cancelled because it doesn't fit the narrative that climate change is caused by humans. While I don’t agree with your previous point, this is a very important point I agree with. We see this cross-domain/in many areas, certain topics are taboo and therefore proper science is not attempted by anyone out of self-preservation. One of the best examples of this is the UFO phenomenon, the stigma has been so strong for nearly a century now that a lot of otherwise-intelligent people are completely blinded to the objective reality.
    - igor47 3y ago
      Can't tell if this is an excellent troll. Reminds me of the moment in "Behind the Curve" Netflix's excellent flat earth documentary, when one of the characters, discussing her feud with another flat earther, says something like "He's just so wrong about stuff. Could I be that wrong...? Eh, nope, I guess I know I'm right" But in case you're not trolling the parent by comparing their climate chance conspiracy theories with even more ridiculous UFO conspiracies, relevant xkcd: https://xkcd.com/2572/ https://xkcd.com/2572/
  - josho 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - blindriver 3y ago
      [flagged]
      - wredue 3y ago
        The biggest problem in the world today are anti-intellectuals actively fighting for a worse world purely on the basis of enjoying what they perceive as “making other people angry”. Hilariously enough, nobody called anyone names till you started. So I suppose that makes the people you’re responding to the “brave and courageous people”.
        thedragonline 3y ago
        IMO, it seems these people exist to muddy the waters. I spent half a decade munging temperature and precip data from multiple institutions around the world (MPI, fer instance). These datasets suggest an unpleasant future, particularly by mid-century. But I'm supposed to ignore all of it because a) experts are wrong b) sunspots!
        wredue 3y ago
        The funny thing is that I am actually upset. I am upset at having to waste so much time on being forced to responding. If we don’t respond, then their propaganda gets to carry to online discussion. It’s tiring, but ultimately, I have kids and am compelled to respond to the bullshit for their sake.
        thedragonline 3y ago
        FWIW, I don't have kids. And given what I've seen in the data, don't intend to.
    - wredue 3y ago
- whycome 3y ago
  > scientists Using that as a term to imply consensus is bad science communication and just fuels climate change denial.
- rad_gruchalski 3y ago
  > Scientists agree Meh. They have also found the solar cycle less surprising for some time.

Worth noting that, according to NASA: Do scientists think that changes in solar irradiance due to the 11-year solar cycle could be strong enough to cause the current change being measured in Earth's climate? In a word, no. Scientists agree that the solar cycle and its associated short-term changes in irradiance cannot be the main force driving the changes in Earth's climate we are currently seeing. For one thing, the Sun's energy output only changes by up to 0.15% over the course of the cycle, less than what would be needed to force the change in climate that we see. Also, scientists have not been able to find convincing evidence that the 11-yr cycle is mirrored in any aspects of the climate beyond the stratosphere – such as surface temperature, rainfall or wind patterns. https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/sunearth/solar-events-news/Does-the-Solar-Cycle-Affect-Earths-Climate.html https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/sunearth/solar-events-new... The cycle is a regular small flucuation in total energy with relatively little change in the part of the spectrum that comes all the way through the atmosphere to heat up the land and water .. ibcreasing insulation trapping that heat has been the driver of climate change here. If you read the linked article or any related science article the focus is on the geomagnetic surges caused by the changes in the suns field.

blindriver 3y ago
[flagged]
- GeoAtreides 3y ago
  Man, do I have good news for you! You don't have to wait, we're already tracking temperature vs solar activity: https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/189/graphic-temperature-vs-solar-activity/ https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/189/graphic-tempe...
  - blindriver 3y ago
    That "solar activity" graph completely contradicts the graph in the article. I'll wait for better data.
    - ben_w 3y ago
      Given the graph starts in 1880: I see you, like myself, are anticipating substantial life extension technology.
    - GeoAtreides 3y ago
      Ah, you're a tricky client! The article has a graph of sunspot numbers, not irradiance! So nothing contradicts anything, but that's not really important! We also have graphs of sun activity vs temperature! http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/thermo/solact.html http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/thermo/solact.htm... But wait! There's more! Here is a graph of sunspot numbers since 1880: https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/couldnt-sun-be-cause-global-warming https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/couldnt-sun... It doesn't feature the global temperature, so it's not perfect, we're sorry! We're very sorry! But it's clearly constant and doesn't exhibit the hockey stick shape of global temperature.
    - cashsterling 3y ago
      Lol... they match up fine for solar activity from 2012 to 2020. This sounds like: "the data doesn't support my thesis so I'll wait for 'better' data. What does 'better data' mean? Data that supports my thesis... thank you very much."
  - wredue 3y ago
    Time to cancel NASA!
- newZWhoDis 3y ago
  >If scientists said that there was a correlation between temperature and Sun activity, they would be cancelled because it doesn't fit the narrative that climate change is caused by humans. While I don’t agree with your previous point, this is a very important point I agree with. We see this cross-domain/in many areas, certain topics are taboo and therefore proper science is not attempted by anyone out of self-preservation. One of the best examples of this is the UFO phenomenon, the stigma has been so strong for nearly a century now that a lot of otherwise-intelligent people are completely blinded to the objective reality.
  - igor47 3y ago
    Can't tell if this is an excellent troll. Reminds me of the moment in "Behind the Curve" Netflix's excellent flat earth documentary, when one of the characters, discussing her feud with another flat earther, says something like "He's just so wrong about stuff. Could I be that wrong...? Eh, nope, I guess I know I'm right" But in case you're not trolling the parent by comparing their climate chance conspiracy theories with even more ridiculous UFO conspiracies, relevant xkcd: https://xkcd.com/2572/ https://xkcd.com/2572/
- josho 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - blindriver 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - wredue 3y ago
      The biggest problem in the world today are anti-intellectuals actively fighting for a worse world purely on the basis of enjoying what they perceive as “making other people angry”. Hilariously enough, nobody called anyone names till you started. So I suppose that makes the people you’re responding to the “brave and courageous people”.
      - thedragonline 3y ago
        IMO, it seems these people exist to muddy the waters. I spent half a decade munging temperature and precip data from multiple institutions around the world (MPI, fer instance). These datasets suggest an unpleasant future, particularly by mid-century. But I'm supposed to ignore all of it because a) experts are wrong b) sunspots!
        wredue 3y ago
        The funny thing is that I am actually upset. I am upset at having to waste so much time on being forced to responding. If we don’t respond, then their propaganda gets to carry to online discussion. It’s tiring, but ultimately, I have kids and am compelled to respond to the bullshit for their sake.
        thedragonline 3y ago
        FWIW, I don't have kids. And given what I've seen in the data, don't intend to.
  - wredue 3y ago
whycome 3y ago
> scientists Using that as a term to imply consensus is bad science communication and just fuels climate change denial.
rad_gruchalski 3y ago
> Scientists agree Meh. They have also found the solar cycle less surprising for some time.