I read this article, and just HAD to post it. Note that it's not disputing global warming, but it questions whether mankind has much to do with it.

...Think I'll go start up the Firebird and let her idle a little bit

Bright sun, warm Earth. Coincidence?

Lorne Gunter National Post Monday, March 12, 2007

Mars's ice caps are melting, and Jupiter is developing a second giant red spot, an enormous hurricane-like storm.

The existing Great Red Spot is 300 years old and twice the size of Earth. The new storm -- Red Spot Jr. -- is thought to be the result of a sudden warming on our solar system's largest planet. Dr. Imke de Pater of Berkeley University says some parts of Jupiter are now as much as six degrees Celsius warmer than just a few years ago.

Neptune's moon, Triton, studied in 1989 after the unmanned Voyageur probe flew past, seems to have heated up significantly since then. Parts of its frozen nitrogen surface have begun melting and turning to gas, making Triton's atmosphere denser.

Even Pluto has warmed slightly in recent years, if you can call -230C instead of -233C "warmer."

And I swear, I haven't left my SUV idling on any of those planets or moons. Honest, I haven't.

Is there something all these heavenly bodies have in common? Some one thing they all share that could be causing them to warm in unison?

Hmmm, is there some giant, self-luminous ball of burning gas with a mass more than 300,000 times that of Earth and a core temperature of more than 20-million degrees Celsius, that for the past century or more has been unusually active and powerful? Is there something like that around which they all revolve that could be causing this multi-globe warming? Naw!

They must all have congested commuter highways, coal-fired power plants and oilsands developments that are releasing large amounts of carbon dioxide into their atmospheres, too.

A decade ago, when global warming and Kyoto was just beginning to capture public attention, I published a quiz elsewhere that bears repeating in our current hyper-charged environmental debate: Quick, which is usually warmer, day or night?

And what is typically the warmest part of the day? The warmest time of year?

Finally, which are generally warmer: cloudy or cloudless days?

If you answered day, afternoon, summer and cloudless you may be well on your way to understanding what is causing global warming.

For the past century and a half, Earth has been warming. Coincidentally (or perhaps not so coincidentally), during that same period, our sun has been brightening, becoming more active, sending out more radiation.

Habibullah Abdussamatov of the Pulkovo Astronomical Observatory in St. Petersburg, Sami Solanki of the Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research in Germany, Sallie Baliunas and Willie Soon of the Solar and Stellar Physics Division of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics and a host of the rest of the world's leading solar scientists are all convinced that the warming of recent years is not unusual and that nearly all the warming in the past 150 years can be attributed to the sun.

Solar scientists from Iowa to Siberia have overlaid the last several warm periods on our planet with known variations in our sun's activity and found, according to Mr. Solanki, "a near-perfect match."

Mr. Abdussamatov concedes manmade gasses may have made "a small contribution to the warming in recent years, but it cannot compete with the increase in solar irradiance."

Mr. Soon showed as long ago as the mid-1990s that the depth of the Little Ice Age -- the coldest period in the northern hemisphere in the past 1,500 years -- corresponded perfectly with a solar event known as the Maunder Minimum. For nearly seven decades there was virtually no sunspot activity.

Our sun was particular quiet. And for those 60 to 70 years, the northern half of our globe, at least, was in a deep freeze.

Is it so hard to believe then that the sun could be causing our current warming, too?

At the very least, the fact that so many prominent scientists have legitimate, logical objections to the current global warming orthodoxy means there is no "consensus" among scientists about the cause.

Here's a prediction: The sun's current active phase is expected to wane in 20 to 40 years, at which time the planet will begin cooling. Since that is when most of the greenhouse emission reductions proposed by the UN and others are slated to come into full effect, the "greens" will see that cooling and claim, "See, we warned you and made you take action, and look, we saved the planet."

Of course, they will have had nothing to do with it.

[email protected]

© National Post 2007

Good informative article. I have to admit it's the first time I've seen this 'point of view'.

This part; "Our sun was particular quiet. And for those 60 to 70 years, the northern half of our globe, at least, was in a deep freeze," is a little simple and misleading. I think the ice caps have been there a long, long time.

If this is true then lets hope that we don't get too much melting in the next 20-40 years that is the predicted span of the sun's increased activity. One thing that has to be remembered is that when the caps melt the result is more absorbtion of heat due to the loss of reflective ice. Once the ice is gone global warming will be nearly impossible to reverse.

When Buffalo, NY gets 3 months of winter instead of it's historical 7 months, then I just might buy into the whole global warming. Until then, I'll go with the theory that this is all cyclical...

PS I can not wait to move to FL. Now that is global warming!

I`ve been saying this for years! the sun is warmer... it flutuates in heartt out put, always has always will....no matter how many fossil fuels we burn.... But of course I dont have the clout as others do....I didnt even invent the internet!

the Martian polar cap getting smaller is NOT because of our Rovers!
.....

actually our current "dirt in the atmosphere" HELPS us , it screens some of the sunlight out , if we didnt have it ,it would be EVEN WARMER!

take THAT Al Gore!

global warming is accurate, but the cause....hmmm...thats the question...

and us "drowning" in 40-50 feet of water after glaciers melt? hmmmm when most of US was covered in glaciers before or all of Scandinavia , those melted....we didnt drown...

I too have been saying the current 'religion' of man made global warming is a bunch of bunk. Trying to blame the increases in global temps on our burning of fossil fuels is crap. What is the largest producer of CO2 in the world? I'll give you a big hint. It is being produced right around your keyboard.

I am in no way saying that global warming is not occurring, just that we are not the cause. I had read articles about the ice caps on Mars are melting, but had not heard about the second storm on Jupiter or the moons around it. I am glad to see that other scientists are finally standing up and say B.S. to the Al Gore cheering section of our planet.

It's nature, we have zero say so on what it will do.

"Religion" is a good word for it; suggesting it's NOT fossil fuels is akin to heresy!

Well, whether you believe Al Gore, which all the Nobel Prize winning, smartest scientist do, or you believe in other causes including religion or sun spots is probably moot. It's moot because even if Al baby is right there's no way the people of Earth are going to get together and start acting responcibly to reverse it. I keep telling my wife that if the people on our street can't even all recycle then how can you expect all of us to get together and change things like Al suggests. It's going to take at least 2/3rds of us doing the right thing to make any changes. I believe that you may get about 10% of the population to change their habits enough to matter and that little bit is just not going to do it. So whoever is right on the cause the effect will be the same and it will not be reversed by man.

I think (my suspicious mind)most governments "into" the Kyoto, and lots of people actually have figured out they can make money on "Global Warming"...lots of jobs created , machinery etc to "combat" it...look at all catalytic converters, car tests etc, etc, being made ,the jobs to do those etc...there`s money in it.....its good for the economy...but its a bunch of Bull cr*p as science...

Just like Y2K was. Sure did boost the economy!

Bjorn, I would say things like catalytic converters and so forth are more to due with the reduction in pollution. I would not count CO2 in the same respect. I completely agree with the general push for reduction of pollution. Cleaner air/ water is better for all concerned.

I also think we should look at alternative energy sources a lot more than we are now. I just do not want to due this because of global warming concerns. For me, it is more a legitimate geopolitical and self sustaining interest.

yes ,and thats the scary part....we cant do much aboutthe sun heating up....I think "most" of these doomsday sayers want you to beleive we can actually DO something....so they can make money on it in the meantime..

I agree , there`s nothing wrong with "cleaning up" exhausts , particles etc...or finding alternatives...but I dont think that we heat the Martian poles ...as some wants us to beleive , or ignore those items ,and just think the WE control everything...I dont think humans are that powerful, theres lots bigger powers in control here... but right now ,it looks like we`ve already "helped" ourselves against too much warming ,by reducing sunlight by 10% via pollution in the air, less sunlight hitting the surface = less heat...2 scientists , one Israeli ,one German found an almost 10% "dimming of the sun" by pollution...so if sun heats us up ,and 10% less light comes thru...means 10% less heat also!

My opinion...we evolved here, we are screwing it up.

To what extent without factoring natural shifts in climatology is irrelevant.

Collectively, 99% of the human race does not give a rats [censored]. Politicians and special interest groups do because there is money in it.

Personally, I believe the human race will wipe out all the natural resources without trying harder to conserve, and about 2-3000 years later, cease to exist.

We came to evolve fighting off disease and viruses/bacteria. Newer strains and medicine have thwarted such evolution.

Let the animals have Earth!

I myself will enjoy my life until the politicians and the moral majority tell me otherwise... Or we all develop a conscience.

personally I think the Earth could be a very nice place....as Tom states , humans are the ones screwing it up, I agree*)...I always thought so...but since nobody listens....we`ll be around here until we evolve ourselves into extinction ,unfortunately , I doubt the animals will survive us....

enough doomsday talk...

but I doubt we can control the suns fluctuations , no matter how much Gore is scaring us

*) just look at what 'hate', religious radicals (all kinds), non understanding of others bring...wars ,wars and wars....to some extent a bliss, otherwise we probably had outgrown this place already...

Here is a great article from 1975, They were sure smart back then. Note the scientist from Columbia is now one of algores buddies. (click on the .PDF link for the orginal article) www.denisdutton.com/cooling_world.htm

Here is a very informative British documentary on global warming and the B.S. involved.

It is over an hour long.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4520665474899458831