Is the Sun driving ozone and changing the climate?

From the JoNova excellent blog, some scientific information that contrasts starkly with the general flood of propaganda.

In 2015 the hunt for clues continues…

The central mystery in climate science is the Sun. The direct energy from the 1.4 million-kilometer-wide flaming ball stays remarkably constant. The radiation pours down on us but the relentless sameness of the watts can’t be causing of the swings in temperature on Earth. Something else is going on with the Sun. For one thing, the total light energy coming off the Sun stays almost the same but the type of light changes — the spectrum shifts –  with more shorter wavelengths at one point in the cycle and longer wavelengths at the opposite part of the cycle. These have different effects. Shorter wavelengths (UV) generate ozone in the stratosphere and penetrate the ocean. Longer wavelengths don’t. But the Sun is also sending out charged particles and driving a massive fluctuating magnetic field, both of which affect Earth’s atmosphere.

But the tiny changes in total sunlight (TSI) may still be leaving us clues about other things going on with the Sun. David Evans’ notch-delay theory is that TSI is a leading indicator, and after solar TSI peaks, the temperatures on Earth follows with a peak roughly 11 years or so later (or one solar cycle). But what’s the mechanism? Stephen Wilde has a theory. Plug in your brain, and follow this chain of potential influence:

The Sun —-> UV or charged particles —- > ozone —->  polar jet streams —–> clouds —–> surface temperatures.

Stephen Wilde  put forward the first version of this hypothesis in 2010. It is long past time to get into those details.

Read all about it here.

Learn about true science, as distinct from political agenda-driven, “settled” pseudo-science.

About Ken McMurtrie

Retired Electronics Engineer, most recently installing and maintaining medical X-Ray equipment. A mature age "student" of Life and Nature, an advocate of Truth, Justice and Humanity, promoting awareness of the injustices in the world.
This entry was posted in AGENDA 21, AGW, climate change, ENVIRONMENT, Science, World Issues and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to Is the Sun driving ozone and changing the climate?

  1. omanuel says:

    Thanks, Ken, for posting this information.

    JoNova and her husband, David Evans, are way ahead of the consensus science community.

    I believe the Sun’s control of Earth’s climate would become obvious if NASA would post complete information on changes in the wavelength of electromagnetic radiation received in the solar system over each solar cycle. NASA obscures these details with misleading claims of almost constant TSI because . . .

    TSI is almost always constant because the Sun itself is a very massive, hot object. Early researchers on “missing solar neutrinos” reported that changes in TSI would be undetectable if the nuclear solar engine turned off for several years!

    Since early studies on sunlight with a prism discovered that a large part of the energy from the Sun arrives on Earth in the form of “invisible” infra-red radiation, NASA refuses to tell the public how the following ratio of electromagnetic radiation changes over a solar cycle:

    Gamma rays: Hard x-rays: Soft x-rays: Extreme UV: Near UV: Visible: Near IR: Mid IR: Far IR: etc.

  2. Thanks Oliver.
    Obvious to any one, including with respect, a blind man, that the source of the heat energy is the sun.
    Can that be denied? I don’t think so.
    Next, what particular parameter(s) of the sun’s radiation cause heating of the earth’s surface?
    UV radiation has been the simple answer because it is the predominant factor.
    TSI and sunspot counts have been mentioned, and now UV component changes, also magnetic influences. It seems that far too little study has been done to establish a complete scientific basis of the sun’s total influence and effects of its variations.
    This has to be the first priority!
    Then, one can consider all the global responses and modifiers, feedback systems etc.
    Being aware of the dramatic shielding effect of clouds during daylight hours and their also dramatic “insulation”/blocking effect keeping heat from escaping during night hours, makes it obvious that all the puny computer modelling, no matter how clever, cannot hope to provide accurate predictions.
    Simply too many variables and the feedback ratios can only be guessed at. The modellers have no clue about accurate cloud/H2O factoring and simply make fools of themselves, as is becoming more obvious in time.
    It might have seemed simple in the beginning to provide the IPCC what “evidence” they needed to set up their Empire. Now, the cards are on the table. Not so simple after all.
    So much conflict from real evidence is interfering with so much conflict of interest.
    There is really no place to hide, except behind the corrupt media. And that is slowly being eroded.
    The truth is certainly emerging. Nevertheless, the “Empire” is established and has an enormous grip on “the world”. Even scientific proof is finding difficulty in being considered valid!

  3. Hello guys, if you want to enroll and obtain a diploma in climatology, for $50 -$150 bucks? Or maybe you prefer to expose the scam:

  4. Guys, WATER CHANGES AND REGULATES THE CLIMATE, not CO2! You are all barking up the wrong tree!”Global” warming is a concocted mythology, for fleecing the Urban Sheep:

    • Stefan, are you sure you are addressing the right people?
      None of ‘us’ are talking about CO2., but about the source of the heat and its influence.
      Certainly water [correction – “water vapour”] is a/the major atmospheric temp regulator, but we must consider the heat energy source!

    • Ken McMurtrie says: ”Certainly water is a/the major atmospheric temp regulator, but we must consider the heat energy source!”

      Ken, i hope you read the post on ”water vapor” – water makes ”milder temp” not warmer OR colder planet! when day temp is cooler and nights warmer – that’s not colder or warmer planet – less water = more extreme temperatures / days are hotter, but nights are cooler = overall is ALWAYS same temp!

      2] here is the Holly Grail, that can put the leading Warmist in jail; if it wasn’t for the ”skeptic’s pagan beliefs…: you want some REAL truth, memorize every sentence in the post; because the truth always wins on the end, this is it:::

      • My mistake to omit the word ‘vapour’, water vapour being, of course, the main surface air temperature regulating ‘device’, as I was trying to say.
        So am I highlighting the two main planetary heat regulating factors that are directly obvious to our senses. The source, and a regulator, both of which we personally sense.
        To dismiss either of these from the ‘equation’ is clearly wrong.
        This post is discussing the details of the heat source and I am suggesting that that is essential, whereas the warmists discount that from their ‘equation’.
        Not too impressed by your explanation on ‘warmer/colder’ or your referenced link.
        Thanks for contributing.
        [To be fair Stefan, I will spend a bit more time on your link. I know I will learn from it, even if I don’t understand or agree with it all].

  5. omanuel says:

    If invisible force fields from the Sun’s pulsar core:

    1. Hold together the tiny whirling subatomic particles that comprise each atom in the solar system to produce the illusion of solid matter orbiting the Sun [See Max Planck’s 1944 description of the illusion of solid matter in his speech at Florence, Italy, and . . .

    2. Were worshipped by our ancestors at the dawning of each new day as invisible spiritual forces that control the physical universe, . . .

    Then the looming showdown ahead will be a re-enactment of the historic battles between the self-will of would-be human rulers of the world and the all-powerful spiritual forces that in fact rule the universe.

    • omanuel says:

      Correction: See Max Planck, “The Essence of Matter,” from a speech Dr. Planck presented in Florence, Italy in 1944, entitled “Das Wesen der Materie” (The Essence/Nature/Character of Matter) Quelle: Archiv zur Geschichte der Max-Planck-Gesellschaft, Abt. Va, Rep. 11 Planck, Nr. 1797:

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s