Pants-of-dog wrote:I will assume that you did not deliberatly edit that article so as to make it seem like climate models do not account for solar variation.
They don't:
Let me also quote from the same article:
In fact, the sun does get hotter when there are more sunspots. Because although the spots are cooler, they’re accompanied by hotter, brighter patches called faculae that cause the overall brightness of the sun to increase by 0.1% at visible wavelengths, and more at ultraviolet wavelengths.
Such increases in solar brightness are included in climate models. It seems the 11-year sunspot cycle as well as the increase in solar activity earlier in the 20th century lead to an increase in average global temperature of 0.1 to 0.2 Celsius… which is only about 20% of the observed increase of 0.5 to1.0 degree.
Did you spot it?
First PoD tells us climate models account for solar VARIATION (they actually don't, except retrospectively, because such changes can't be predicted accurately). In support of this claim, he posts a statement that increases in solar BRIGHTNESS are accounted for in climate models. But brightness is not the only way the sun varies, so this statement does not in fact support PoD's claim. This bait-and-switch is a perfectly routine rhetorical trick for PoD. He does it often. Almost always, he gets away with it because it is so subtle and sneaky. He counts on most people not reading carefully enough to catch on to his deceit.
As it turns out (as far as we know), computer models of the climate do not take these indirect effects of solar activity into account when calculating the change in global climate. And while human activity counts for only 5% of carbon dioxide emitted into the atmosphere each year, the sun accounts for ALL the energy striking the Earth and driving its dynamic and enormously complex ocean currents and atmosphere.
- See more at: http://oneminuteastronomer.com/1054/sun ... ing/#.dpuf
Now, there are two possible explanations that are supposedly not taken into account in climate models.
1. Cosmic rays.
2. Ozone disruption.
Feel free to provide evidence for either hypothesis.
Two? There are any number of explanations not taken into account in climate models:
- The weakening and shifting of the earth's magnetic field
- Changes in ocean circulation
- Changes in upper atmosphere wind patterns
- Changing land use and vegetation
- Changes in ocean ecology caused by overfishing and pollution.
Etc.