SUN SPOTS-POINTS OF DISGREEMENT

Obviously sun spots have a major although temporary effect on the temperatures on Earth. Greens who believe that Man is the cause of most global warming try to argue that the effect is small. Other scientists throughout history have observed that Earth cools and warms depending on the activity of sun spots. Sun spots have various cycles, some short and some long.

According to Lifesite News.com major Sun spot activity has occured every 1,500 years over at least the last 1,000,000 years. (Seems the old saying that there is nothing new under the Sun fits here.) As an interesting footnote to the article they state that during these cycles there are major releases of CO2 from the ocean floor. (See on our blog a discussion of Arctic Ice Melt and the release of CO2 from volcanoes on the sea floor.) These releases are much more than the amount created by man. They also believe that it is now not as hot as during the Medieval Warm Period when the Vikings actually grew crops in Greenland. (Where do we think they got the name 'Greenland'?) Of course the Greens ignore this fact and bemoan the loss of the current ice cover of Greenland. Within this major cycle there are eleven year cycles of increasing and decreasing Sun spot activity. This cycle is agreed to in the article referenced below posted by Czech Republic physicists Lubos Motl, a man caused Global Warming believer, except he describes it as a twenty two year cycle and believes it is insignificant.

British economist and astronomer, William Herschel in 1801 began to predict grain prices based on sun spot activity. His observations led him to notice a pattern in the weather and to theorize that more sun spots made a warmer Earth. This link will take you to a Christian Science Monitor article detailing his beliefs. Scientists have been arguing about this for two hundred years since. This article expresses the belief of some scientists that Sun spots generate more cloud cover and thus cool the Earth.

SUN SPOTS AND CLOUD COVER

Czech Republic physicist, Lubos Motl seems to agree with this theory. In a blog post during 2004, he stated that the greater the sun spot activity the cooler the Earth since in certain areas it creates more cloud cover which may cause cooler temperatures. Mr Motl's blog was recently voted best European blog. However, Mr Motl, when 'googled', seems to sometimes go off half cocked. There are numerous articles critical of his jumping to conclusions by condemning those who would disagree with him. These are frequently followed by public apologies by Mr Motl.

My Comments on Cloud Cover Effect

The first article also quotes a scientist from the Goddard Space Institute (home of Al Gore's protege, James Hansen) who discusses an argument that more sun spot activity actually cools the Earth. Their theory, based on cloud cover observations for most of the Twentieth Century, is that during periods of high sun spot activity there were more clouds. Then they attempt to say, with no evidence that clouds make it warmer or cooler, that the effect would actually make it cooler. I have experience based on personal observations for years in a weather forecast and observation center in this matter. Many nights we would forecast a low temperature based on clear skies. Suddenly, a blob of clouds would float over and the temperature would increase by four or five degrees. If I were biased I would at this point say that, as cited elsewhere in this blog, Water Vapor is the number one green house gas, that sun spots make more clouds, and use that limited example as proof that sun spots cause an increase in temperature through the generation of more clouds. Seems logical, right? Wrong. During the day we would predict a high temperature based on clear skies (if we thought they would be clear). However, if a layer of clouds floated over us the temperature rise would stop and it would remain cooler than normal while the clouds were there. This could give credence to the Goddard argument that clouds cool the Earth, sun spots cause clouds, thus sun spots cool the Earth. I believe both theories have little relevance to the primary question of whether or not sun spots cause Global Warming. Clouds moderate whatever temperature conditions are already there and in effect. Clouds do trap heat escaping from the Earth. They then radiate or transmit it back to Earth. This causes a back and forth heat exchange between the surface of the Earth and the base of the clouds. The opposite happens on top of the clouds. Ever see a thunderstorm building in the distance on a hot summer's afternoon? The tops of the clouds look sort of like a cauliflouer, bright white and crisp in outline. That bright white is caused by the water vapor which has condensed into water droplets reflecting the Sun's rays back off in all directions, primarily back to outer space. Now, look at the bottom of the cloud. As the thunderstorm builds the base of the cloud gets darker and darker. Why? Because the Sun's rays cannot penetrate the thick clouds and water vapor. It might seem that Goddard is right and clouds caused by the Sun's rays (via sun spots) actually allow little radiation through and must cool the Earth. Right? Wrong! In the case of the thunderstorm many forces were at work and already in operation before the clouds formed. The morning was clear. The Sun heated the ground. Hot air rises and so the warmed air over the ground rises. As it warms water vapor becomes concentrated, cools as it rises, and condenses to water droplets (clouds). Without this wonderful mechanism Earth would be a hostile, hot barren desert. It keeps the air from getting too hot at the surface, actually lifting much of the heat into the upper layers of the atmosphere, and decreases extreme swings of temperature. It seems to me along that same line that this protective mechanism kicks in for many other situations. What would happen if as Sun spots grow stronger and more solar radiation bombards the Earth there were no mechanism to form clouds? The Earth would bake. However, we have these wonderful oceans covering much of the planet. As Sun spots increase in intensity the water warms and some of it evaporates and goes into the air and more clouds do form. The clouds do perform a cooling or moderating function. However, they do so because sun spots do warm the earth. The part Goddard doesn't get is that even though the clouds are cooling things that it would be tremendously warmer without them. The Sun spots heat the Earth. The clouds cool it to a lesser degree. However, let's bring this argument down to its most elementary level. The closer you get to the Sun the hotter it is. Right? Thus the more of the Sun's rays you get the hotter you get. Right? Seems logical to me. How could Sun spots not cause warming? Apparently according to Motl and others like him the Earth would just get cooler and cooler the higher the level of Sun spot activity. Give me a break!