Originally posted by ArmchairGeneral
View Post
Um, no. That is, yes, the temps are high after 1960, but there is no trend, on either graph, after that time. If you're looking at the blue line on the second graph, that's not solar irradiance, that's surface temps. If you can't see that the solar min at '53 and the solar max at '57 are virtually identical to the min at '96 and the max at '00, I don't know what to say.
But again, the important things to remember, for you and for me, are
1) There is really no good, solid data for solar output much earlier than 1950. It's really speculative and correlative before that (sunspots, growth rings, etc.) so in my opinion that part of the chart shouldn't even exist because it implies similar data throughout.
2) There is no proof that there is, or should be, a simple, linear relation between solar output and global temperature. I happen to think that it's the first and best candidate and should be studied extensively so we can determine its relevance, certainly before we start crying about CO2 and the like.
-dale
Comment