Thread by @ScottDuncanWX

Wait for it... 140 years of global temperature compared to carbon dioxide trends in 6 seconds.

We cannot blame the sun for our abruptly changing climate.

THREAD [1/7]

Here we go...

To quote @NASA: "The amount of solar energy received by the Earth has followed the Sun’s natural 11-year cycle of small ups and downs with no net increase since the 1950s. Over the same period, global temperature has risen markedly...

[2/7]

... It is therefore extremely unlikely that the Sun has caused the observed global temperature warming trend over the past half-century."

@NASA comment source: climate.nasa.gov/climate_resour…

The data speaks for itself. It is not rocket science (no pun intended).

[3/7]

But we are only looking at temperature and carbon dioxide over the last 140 years... What about before that?

Let's step back 2,000 years.

The large jump in carbon dioxide and global temperature go hand-in-hand.

It is not a coincidence.

[4/7]

However, let's not ignore the sun though... Changes in solar activity definitely plays an important role in climate.

For example, low solar activity played a major role in 'the little ice age' (the Maunder Minimum): en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_cyc…

[5/7]

The activity of the sun has and always will have an impact on global temperature but simply cannot account for abrupt warming in recent decades.

This is not my opinion - this is what the data shows. You don't need statistics to work this out.

[6/7]

Some of the main reasons why carbon dioxide is dwarfing any solar influence are summarised here: skepticalscience.com/argument.php

Please look through... nearly 200 points are covered on skeptical claims with scientific explainers. This is the first 20...

[7/7]