There's no solid direct connection that we can determine as yet. At least not in the science I've read. There is SOME connection, obviously. One thing we know for sure is that sunspot activity is directly related to electromagnetic interference. Solar flares associated with sunspots, for example, can cause communications brownouts, etc.
Climate is also affected by orbital mechanics, atmospheric loads such as volcanic dust and greenhouse gases, etc. It's a complex system.
Hi Art, I would submit that the solid direct connection between solar activity and Earth's climate is established every day of the year, at sunrise. This book is worth reading, because it has to do with actual experiments.But, as you say, it is a complex system - as Freeman Dyson has pointed out, the biosphere is the single most complex system we study, and what we know of it is but a small fraction of what we can know. Hence, it would seem unwise to jump to conclusions either way.
As usual, I find myself in agreement with Dyson, as I have so many times.
Of course solar activity has a direct connection to climate because solar power is the ultimate power source for everything on this planet, including fossil fuels, which were created from decay products of photosynthetic plants.
The issue with sunspots is solar variance: our star is a mildly variable star, with a typically eleven year cycle between solar maximums. What is not at all clear, mostly because we only have 150 years or so of hard data, plus a few centuries of less rigorous data, is that the solar variance cycle, which is tracked in part BY sunspot activity may or may not have a DIRECT influence on climate change. Chaos theory would seem to indicate that it has an indirect effect, via energetic tipping points, rather than a straightforward, literally direct effect. The atmosphere is also a very major factor in the climate equation, and so man-made effects on the atmosphere really do make a difference. I don't think that should be diminished; sometimes it may be over-emphasized in the media, but I think it's really dangerous to pretend it's not a big factor.
The cosmic ray issue has been considered before. There has been a mystery about cosmic ray output from within our sun for some time; it seems to be less than it theoretically should be, and we don't know why. There probably is something there, but again it's probably not direct, but indirect, working its way through many aspects of a complex system.
So, because the system IS so complex, I don't think we can rule out that man-made contributions to climate change are negligible. Nor would I ever suggest that solar activity effects are negligible. They're all tied together in a complex system.
I think we can all agree that we should care for and not abuse the planet. It's a subset of good manners. But the permanent damage done to Yellowstone by officials who thought they knew more than they did should be a cautionary tale for all of us.
There's no solid direct connection that we can determine as yet. At least not in the science I've read. There is SOME connection, obviously. One thing we know for sure is that sunspot activity is directly related to electromagnetic interference. Solar flares associated with sunspots, for example, can cause communications brownouts, etc.
ReplyDeleteClimate is also affected by orbital mechanics, atmospheric loads such as volcanic dust and greenhouse gases, etc. It's a complex system.
Hi Art,
ReplyDeleteI would submit that the solid direct connection between solar activity and Earth's climate is established every day of the year, at sunrise. This book is worth reading, because it has to do with actual experiments.But, as you say, it is a complex system - as Freeman Dyson has pointed out, the biosphere is the single most complex system we study, and what we know of it is but a small fraction of what we can know. Hence, it would seem unwise to jump to conclusions either way.
As usual, I find myself in agreement with Dyson, as I have so many times.
ReplyDeleteOf course solar activity has a direct connection to climate because solar power is the ultimate power source for everything on this planet, including fossil fuels, which were created from decay products of photosynthetic plants.
The issue with sunspots is solar variance: our star is a mildly variable star, with a typically eleven year cycle between solar maximums. What is not at all clear, mostly because we only have 150 years or so of hard data, plus a few centuries of less rigorous data, is that the solar variance cycle, which is tracked in part BY sunspot activity may or may not have a DIRECT influence on climate change. Chaos theory would seem to indicate that it has an indirect effect, via energetic tipping points, rather than a straightforward, literally direct effect. The atmosphere is also a very major factor in the climate equation, and so man-made effects on the atmosphere really do make a difference. I don't think that should be diminished; sometimes it may be over-emphasized in the media, but I think it's really dangerous to pretend it's not a big factor.
The cosmic ray issue has been considered before. There has been a mystery about cosmic ray output from within our sun for some time; it seems to be less than it theoretically should be, and we don't know why. There probably is something there, but again it's probably not direct, but indirect, working its way through many aspects of a complex system.
So, because the system IS so complex, I don't think we can rule out that man-made contributions to climate change are negligible. Nor would I ever suggest that solar activity effects are negligible. They're all tied together in a complex system.
I think we can all agree that we should care for and not abuse the planet. It's a subset of good manners. But the permanent damage done to Yellowstone by officials who thought they knew more than they did should be a cautionary tale for all of us.
ReplyDelete