For class tomorrow, please watch this video about ‘unstoppable solar cycles.’ What is the hypothesis of this video? How can one test this hypothesis? How, if at all, does the material in The Discovery of Global Warming refute this hypothesis?
For class tomorrow, please watch this video about ‘unstoppable solar cycles.’ What is the hypothesis of this video? How can one test this hypothesis? How, if at all, does the material in The Discovery of Global Warming refute this hypothesis?
The hypothesis of the video is that the sun is the major cause of the recent increase in temperature and that the variation of sunlight induce climate change. It also claims that temperature increases before Co2. The drilling of ice cores and measurement of radiocarbon in tree rings can tell us about fluctuation in the climate especially before humans became a factor.
The Discovery of Global Warming mentions this hypothesis and in fact it was considered before carbon dioxide. It does make strong references to the work of scientists such as John Eddy and Broecker who found a correlation between climate and the sun. However, the hypothesis has been “an intriguing but unproven possibilty” (126) Therefore the book is neutral on the hypothesis.
The video’s hypothesis was that the sun’s natural cycle correlates with the earth’s. Since the sun is the main supplier and driver of energy, the changes it undergoes also affects the earth’s temperature. I dont know how accurate the video was, or where they got their sources from, but during the video they displayed a chart of the earth’s cycle.
200BC-600AD – Roman Warming
400-900 Dark Ages Cooling
900- 1300 Medival Warming
1300-1850 Little Ice Age (phase 1 & 2)
1850- present (The Modern Warming)
Both the book and the video are just ideas. Within the chapters of the book, we see the gradual changes of ideas up until the modern theory of why CO2 is effecting our climate. And the video says that the earth’s temperature is rising first, followed by the CO2 rise.
The hypothesis of the movie has already been stated. What remains is to decide whether human CO2 emission lead to global warming, or – as the movie contests – CO2 is the product of a feedback cycle that uncontrollable sun cycles put into motion.
In the last chapter of The Discovery of Global Warming, the final word of the IPCC in 1995 is quoted as “The balance of evidence suggests that there is a discernible human influence on global climate.” While this stance is obviously fairly cautious, it seems to me to be based primarily on relatively certain evidence from the GCMs, showing that a doubling of CO2 in the atmosphere will lead to significant warming.
The movie also failed to mention greenhouse gases other than CO2, such as methane, and very importantly sulfate aerosols. These had at first thrown off the GCM calculations, but had been figured in leading up the the IPCC report in 1995.
Noah, Hai and Edwin have stated the main points of the movie very nicely. I think an important part of the movie is the discussion about the past warming and cooling. This directly contradicts Dire Predictions. On one side, the movie says that there is a constant oscillation of warming and cooling caused by the sun, while the book says that humans cause the recent warming.
This debate is centered upon which science you believe in. At the end of the movie, it mentioned that everyone needs to see the whole truth about global warming. However, this debate is all about interpretations.
The hypothesis of the video “Unstoppable Solar Cycles” is that the global climate system is too complex for humans to affect it so dramatically. Instead, change in solar radiation is what causes the earth to cool and warm. Stating that temperature affects CO2 levels rather than the other way around defends this hypothesis.
It is not possible to only look at solar cycles. Human impact, geology, oceanography, and other forms of sciences also need to be considered in order to know the true cause of climate change. In Global Warming Solutions, scientists of different fields needed to collaborate to learn more about climate change. Eventually they realized that they needed insight from other scientists because the earth is too complex for only one thing to cause climate change.
The video also does not report the GCM results. These results stated that if the CO2 level doubles, the temperature would rise between 1.5 and 4.5°C. These computers, after improvements in technology and many tests, have proven to be accurate. Ultimately, it shows that humans, by emitting high levels of CO2 into the air, will cause temperatures to rise. (The opposite of the video).
The video did have a lot of information which I have not been exposed to in the past. After the movie, I spent a couple of minutes thinking over this new information and I found myself in a situation where I was caught between two banks of contesting scientific knowledge. Not to say that the information contradicts the others findings, but more that it contributes to the facilitation of a contradicting idea. On one hand I have been led to previously believe that climate change is a phenomenon that we have caused and therefore we can undo. On the other hand climate change is caused by natural forces and cannot be reversed as it is a natural cycle. But the negative impacts are evident and in my opinion, I think its about time scientists and researches stop discussing the causes of climate change and work towards methods to combat its onslaught on conventional human systems which we depend on. I decided not to personally question ideas such as whether CO2 actually makes an impact or not but view what the changes truly are- the fact that we are warming up and cities are in danger. But, an unavoidable question which arises correspondingly is that to combat it we need to understand its roots. I agree, but I think we should attempt to invest, intellectually and financially, into ideas which are outside the box and approach the problem backwards instead of the conventional path we are on today.
Well i thought the movie was great! What a Bias answer. No but really i believe the movie explains just what I was trying to put forth into class. I dont think that humans can that much of an impact that would alter the whole global climate. The sun being the main energy supplier of the earth, according to scientists and NASA, would have the ability to affect the climate on a global scale. I like that the movie shows the history of the Vickings and how their disappearence displays how climate can change and fluctuate rapidly just like how the book spells it out. If climate can change in years time then why cant this current change be in that category. I also thought is was very interesting how the graphs actually show temperature increase before carbon dioxide levels proving that because of the temperatures the carbon level goes up not vice versa.
Overall, the main theme in the video “Unstoppable Solar Cycles” was that humans have not significantly contributed to the earth’s warming. Rather, according to the clip, the sun is the cause for this natural cycle, and therefore, the media and our politicians have exaggerated global warming and its possible effects.
These are statements that were then supported by scientists who also stated that global warming is a natural phenomena that has occurred regularly in our planets history. A belief that they supported by showing that CO2 levels rose only after the temperature did (not the other way around).
These are indeed very plausible reasons for the current warming of our planet; however, they contradict many of the facts given in the novels “The Discovery of Global Warming” and “Dire Predictions”; both of which strongly suggest that global warming is occurring. In fact, the book “Dire Predictions” actually goes in depth to show that “the increase in atmospheric CO2” is not a result of natural cycles, which is evidence that would directly refute one of the video’s main hypothesis (Dire Predictions 34).
Therefore, even though I find it great that we are seeing different perspectives on this issue, I also think that we need to really analyze the data that is being presented to us, because only then will we unravel the truth.
The main hypothesis of the movie is global warming is a climate cycle that causes by the solar system. It also points out that the human’s emissions of greenhouse gases could not have an significant impact on our climate change, since the temperatures leads CO2 by the 600 years. It means that CO2 is not the cause of global warming, quite the reverse, it is an indicator of the tendency of temperatures
It is great to the different theory of the climate change but I totally not agree with this video If the information that shows on the video is true, that means human beings have no responsible for the global warming since the sun is the main driver and supplier of energy to heat the earth. So..I am just wondering that in this way we cannot do anything to stop the global warming because the solar cycle is unstoppable. Have you guys watched the video “Six Degree could change the world” ? It points out that every single degree increased could the has a devastating ecological impact on our planet over the next century. If global warming is really caused by the unstoppable solar cycle, that means we have to face the climate disasters without any solution.
Both the book “The discovery of global warming” and “Dire Predictions” show us many evidences to support that human impacts should be responsible for the climate changes of recent decades. We should focus on the two words “recent decades” instead of 600 years ago.
Since the hypothesis was already mentioned by a few people, I’ll try to answer one of the other questions:
A really easy way to test the hypothesis that the video makes is by actually lowering our carbon emissions and seeing if, in the long run, that actually does anything. I know by the time we can have enough data to answer the question our generation will be long gone, but it is really the only thing we can do to ensure that we are doing everything we can to save the planet. It is extremely important to let the public be aware of this side of the argument as well, but it is extremely frustrating to me that all scientists can’t come together and say, “whether anthropogenic global warming is a fact or not, we believe we should do all we can to make sure our planet is safe”.
As previously stated the video’s main hypothesis is that global warming is a natural phenomenon caused by the sun and not by humans. The supporting evidence, the trend of the earth warming BEFORE the increase in CO2 had me confused for a while as I had never seen this graph before. I believe that both sides of the issue are selectively choosing the evidence they present. As Noah, Steph, and Yen brought up the video clip did not mention the other greenhouse gases, nor did it mention the fact that the ratio of naturally derived carbon sources has been decreasing as the earth warms. Weart took us through the history of global warming studies. His writing clearly is biased towards the idea of anthropogenic global warming, but he assumes a more objective tone that merely presents examples of the skeptics and the discoveries of various scientists that refute these claims. He emphasizes the uncertainty of science, ultimately allowing readers to draw their own conclusions.
I want to reiterate the point from Dire Predictions. We know solar variations certainly do influence the earth’s temperature, as the video puts it, “we know 99.9% of the earth’s energy is from the sun.” What’s important is that we have the technology to monitor the sun spots and to calculate the effect that the suns cycles should have on the earth. Dire Predictions, however, illustrates the the current temperatures exceed what would have probably be seen had humans not intensified global warming. While there is a correlation between solar cycles and CO2, the temperature is warming faster than the sun on its own would could have caused because of human influences.
Hiya! That web-site is da greatest, and I’ve been searching for dis site for a long time ‘n I’m so happy I finally found it.
I’m 21 years of age and doing my bachelors at Princeton.
I’m the sort of guy who enjoys to taste brand-new things. Currently I’m making my private solar panels. I’m making it all alone without the aid of my men. I am utilizing the internet as the only way to acheive that. I encountered a really amazing site which explains how to contruct pv panels and so on. The website explains all the steps required to solar panel construction.
I am not exactly sure about how accurate the information given there is. If some people over here who have experience with these things can have a see and give your feedback in the thread it will be awesome and I would highly value it, because I extremely would love to try solar panel construction.
Thanks a lot for so entertaining written piece. Awesome job!