[Truth To Power]

NASA - The Causes of Climate Change

While the Sun has played a role in past climate changes, the evidence shows the current warming cannot be explained by the Sun.

That "evidence" consists of contriving fallacious and disingenuous rationalizations for ignoring and dismissing the evidence: the coldest 500-year period in the last 10,000 years coincided with the lowest sustained solar activity, while the "current" -- i.e., 20th century -- warming coincided with the highest sustained solar activity in thousands of years.

Evidence Shows That Current Global Warming Cannot Be Explained by Solar Irradiance

See? They have to pretend TSI is the only possible way the sun could affect the earth's surface temperature, ignoring and dismissing spectral changes, magnetic effects, and every other possible way the sun could affect the earth's surface temperature.

European Commission - Causes of climate change

These are claims, assertions and conclusions, not evidence.

I'm certainly not an expert in the field and it is always wise to question sources, their methodology and agendas, but I can quote reputable sources saying the exact opposite of your conclusions all day.

No doubt. The same could be said of neoclassical economics. That doesn't make either of them right.

They are all wrong and we have nothing to worry about is what you are saying? @Truth To Power

We have plenty of things to worry about. But the anti-CO2 hysteria mongers are all wrong because CO2 emissions from using fossil fuels isn't one of them.

[Pants-of-dog]

No, that is just another bald fabrication on your part. The evidence I presented only goes back less than 50 years. You are simply making things up again, as usual.

What did I get wrong?

If by "the Earth" you mean its surface, then the cooling of the lower troposphere constitutes excellent evidence that the earth's surface is also cooling.

Find a willingness to know that fact. Now.

The lower troposphere is just part of the Earth. You claim the entire Earth is cooling down. This is not the case.

No, you simply "misunderstood" what it says. Don't you know what "in contrast to" means?

Find a willingness to know the fact that "in contrast to" means with an opposite result. Now.

Then quote the text that supports your claim.

In fact, heat deaths are a very minor component of all climate-related deaths, and such data appear not to have been recorded before 2000 despite considerable numbers of such deaths.

See? You again only looked long enough to contrive a way to evade and dismiss the evidence I provided. It's always the same.

From your source:

When we look at the trajectory of unusually high summer temperatures over time (defined as ‘unusually high’ in the context of historical records) we see an upward trend in recent decades.

....

In the visualization here we show trends in the share of US land area experiencing unusually low winter temperatures. In recent years there appears to have been a declining trend in the extent of the US experiencing particularly cold winters.

[late]

Why is summer hotter than winter? Why is July hotter than June?

Better question, why do you pretend to be something you're not?

[Pants-of-dog]

Note that July gets less sun than June.

[Truth To Power]

Note that July gets less sun than June.

Yet it is hotter. Why?

[Truth To Power]

Better question, why do you pretend to be something you're not?

I don't know what you think I am pretending to be.

[Pants-of-dog]

Yet it is hotter. Why?

Well, we know it is not the sun.

[Truth To Power]

delete

[Truth To Power]

What did I get wrong?

You falsely claimed that the evidence shows 2016 was the hottest year ever.

The lower troposphere is just part of the Earth.

No, it is specifically the part immediately above the surface, which, more than any other part of the earth, would be expected to heat up if the surface was heating.

You claim the entire Earth is cooling down. This is not the case.

You are aware that I meant the earth's surface, where people live and climate happens. And you are most certainly wrong, as the entire earth is definitely cooling as it slowly loses its internal heat to space.

Then quote the text that supports your claim.

You already did.

From your source:

When we look at the trajectory of unusually high summer temperatures over time (defined as ‘unusually high’ in the context of historical records) we see an upward trend in recent decades.
....
In the visualization here we show trends in the share of US land area experiencing unusually low winter temperatures. In recent years there appears to have been a declining trend in the extent of the US experiencing particularly cold winters.

So the more active sun has warmed the earth. And your point would be...?

[Truth To Power]

Well, we know it is not the sun.

Isn't it? What else could it be?

[Pants-of-dog]

You falsely claimed that the evidence shows 2016 was the hottest year ever.

So you agree that 2016 was the hottest year recorded, and that this is cherry picking.

Your only objection is that you chose to define ever as "all time" instead of "out of all the records".

No, it is specifically the part immediately above the surface, which, more than any other part of the earth, would be expected to heat up if the surface was heating.

You are aware that I meant the earth's surface, where people live and climate happens. And you are most certainly wrong, as the entire earth is definitely cooling as it slowly loses its internal heat to space.

Then you miswrote your claim.

You already did.

The part i quoted shows you are wrong.

So the more active sun has warmed the earth. And your point would be...?

You claimed deaths from heat are decreasing. The quoted text contradicts you.

Isn't it? What else could it be?

So you are arguing that an area at a time when it is receiving less sun gets hotter than the same area when it has more sun.

Lol.

[late]

So the more active sun has warmed the earth.

You keep pretending you can rewrite science, it's pathetic.

[Steve_American]

Truth To Power wrote:
So the more active sun has warmed the earth.

You keep pretending you can rewrite science, it's pathetic.

My sources say that NASA has been directly measuring solar out put reaching the earth for decades.
The data shows that the sun has been sending the earth less energy each year over the last 10 to 20 years.

So, ToP has bad sources or he is lying.

.

[Pants-of-dog]

When you point out that the sun has been emitting less energy to the Earth, @Truth To Power says that it is not Total Solar Irradiance (TSI) that is the significant factor.

When you ask him what actual factor of the sun’s energy is significant, he refuses to answer.

[Truth To Power]

Truth To Power wrote:
So the more active sun has warmed the earth.

My sources say that NASA has been directly measuring solar out put reaching the earth for decades.
The data shows that the sun has been sending the earth less energy each year over the last 10 to 20 years.

So, ToP has bad sources or he is lying.

So you think if your house is at 20C, and you set the thermostat down from 24 to 22, your house will get cooler?

[Truth To Power]

When you point out that the sun has been emitting less energy to the Earth, @Truth To Power says that it is not Total Solar Irradiance (TSI) that is the significant factor.

When you ask him what actual factor of the sun’s energy is significant, he refuses to answer.

No, I state that I do not know -- unlike anti-fossil-fuel hysteria mongers, who falsely claim that they do know.

[Truth To Power]

So you agree that 2016 was the hottest year recorded, and that this is cherry picking.

How would it be cherry picking?

Your only objection is that you chose to define ever as "all time" instead of "out of all the records".

It would be honest to say, "ever recorded." It is dishonest to say, "ever."

Then you miswrote your claim.

No I did not.

The part i quoted shows you are wrong.

No it does not.

You claimed deaths from heat are decreasing.

No I did not.

The quoted text contradicts you.

No it does not.

So you are arguing that an area at a time when it is receiving less sun gets hotter than the same area when it has more sun.

It's certainly possible. See July vs June. Can you find a willingness to know the fact that the Northern Hemisphere gets hotter in July even though it is getting less sun than it did in June? Please answer Yes or No.

Lol.

Thanks for proving you are not intellectually qualified to express an opinion on the matter.

[Pants-of-dog]

No, I state that I do not know -- unlike anti-fossil-fuel hysteria mongers, who falsely claim that they do know.

So you admit that your argument that the sun is responsible for climate is an argument from ignorance.

How would it be cherry picking?

It would be honest to say, "ever recorded." It is dishonest to say, "ever."

No I did not.

No it does not.

No I did not.

No it does not.

It's certainly possible. See July vs June. Can you find a willingness to know the fact that the Northern Hemisphere gets hotter in July even though it is getting less sun than it did in June? Please answer Yes or No.

Thanks for proving you are not intellectually qualified to express an opinion on the matter.

Your lack of argument (other than to agree with me that July is hotter despite receiving less sun) is noted.

Since July is hotter than June despite receiving less sun, we can see that factors other than the sun are also responsible for heating the Earth.

[Truth To Power]

So you admit that your argument that the sun is responsible for climate is an argument from ignorance.

No, because unlike you, I have not chosen to make myself permanently ignorant of the relevant indisputable facts of objective physical reality:
1. The earth gets effectively all its surface heat from the sun, which is consequently the default explanation for surface temperature variation.
2. The coldest 500-year period in the last 10,000 years coincided with the period of lowest solar activity.
3. The return to more normal Holocene temperatures was accompanied by the highest sustained solar activity in several thousand years.
4. Whether the earth's surface is heating or cooling depends on whether its current temperature is above or below the equilibrium surface temperature for current conditions, not on whether the equilibrium temperature for current conditions has recently risen or fallen.
5. Etc.

Your lack of argument (other than to agree with me that July is hotter despite receiving less sun) is noted.

No. I am the one who informed you that July is hotter despite receiving less sun, as a way of proving that your "argument" is fallacious.

Since July is hotter than June despite receiving less sun, we can see that factors other than the sun are also responsible for heating the Earth.

No. What we see is that you have to keep yourself permanently ignorant of the fact that whether an area is heating or cooling does not depend on whether it is currently receiving more or less sunlight than before, but on whether its current temperature is above or below the equilibrium temperature for the amount of sunlight it is currently receiving. I do not believe you are so stupid that you can't understand that. So you must have chosen not to understand it.

[Pants-of-dog]

No, because unlike you, I have not chosen to make myself permanently ignorant of the relevant indisputable facts of objective physical reality:
1. The earth gets effectively all its surface heat from the sun, which is consequently the default explanation for surface temperature variation.
2. The coldest 500-year period in the last 10,000 years coincided with the period of lowest solar activity.
3. The return to more normal Holocene temperatures was accompanied by the highest sustained solar activity in several thousand years.
4. Whether the earth's surface is heating or cooling depends on whether its current temperature is above or below the equilibrium surface temperature for current conditions, not on whether the equilibrium temperature for current conditions has recently risen or fallen.
5. Etc.

No. I am the one who informed you that July is hotter despite receiving less sun, as a way of proving that your "argument" is fallacious.

No. What we see is that you have to keep yourself permanently ignorant of the fact that whether an area is heating or cooling does not depend on whether it is currently receiving more or less sunlight than before, but on whether its current temperature is above or below the equilibrium temperature for the amount of sunlight it is currently receiving. I do not believe you are so stupid that you can't understand that. So you must have chosen not to understand it.

So what exactly is your argument about climate?

Be specific.