I replied to Kes

Hi Kes,
Obviously, there is more information out there than the one organization Terry Ball is associated with. Like you said we should look at information from both sides and draw our own opinion.
I am sending you some other information regarding solar warming of other planets etc.
I never got from Timothy Ball that there is no need for concern. He said and I agree that all of us need to be concerned about pollution and polluting and being proactive in reducing our consumption of hydro carbons. Nobody disputes that 15 percent of the worlds population controls and uses 85 percent of the worlds man produced wealth.
The difference in scientific opinion is that the main stream thinking follows the ‘people are to blame for global warming’ theory. A much smaller scientific community believes that there is a bigger universal picture that needs to be recognized in that regard.
These should be two different arguments. What is causing Climate Change? And how should all of the rich people of the world be proactive in reducing the levels of pollution and polluting activities?
Just because the herd is following doesn’t mean it is necessarily right. Back in the 1400’s most of the civilized world thought the earth was flat and if you went past the horizon you’d just fall off.
Lobbying to have your data recognized is no more biased than having a multi million dollar organized movement headed by a high profile politician(Al Gore ) that makes a movie supporting only 1 point of view and then try to proliferate that point of view in ways such as trying to deliver it into the hands of the public school system for mass consumption as completely factual and true.
These are your words Kes and I couldn’t agree more with them.
“The key to finding unbiased information is finding the facts and creating your own opinion. In this case real scientific data not some group scientist who's hands are in the back pocket of the industries at blame and over eager to start pointing fingers. Actually look at both sides of the story and decide from there.”

When you talk about the population levels and their effect on climate, I would use the vast amount of hydrocarbon reserves in the ground, oil, gas, coal etc.as pretty strong evidence that it took a pretty massive amount of population of some kind to produce it. Even today its pretty common scientific knowledge that domesticated animals are one of the largest contributors to green house gasses on the planet. Did this planet become so overrun with giant animals that the earth shutdown in its ability to support them or did some humongous cosmic event occur that wiped them out and created this incredible energy supply in the ground?

Personally I don’t have any problem with controlling our consumption. What each person does in their day to day lives can do a lot to reduce pollution and consumption. You’re right if you think that most people don’t give a rats butt or if they do its okay as long as it doesn’t affect the plans they have to buy this that and whatever so they can live the life they ‘deserve”.
The more people that buy into energy conservation, less consumption , less polluting the better it will be for all of us. But those emerging middle classes in India and China aren’t too worried. In our shrinking global village they are learning to be consumers and they’re not going to stop anytime soon.
There are historic examples that it is impossible to stop what and where humanity migrate to. Whether it’s the poor people of Europe coming by the millions to North America, Millions of Latin and South American migrating to the United States or the massive desire for a consumers society in India and China.
Its true these events cause radical changes.
Its a radical point of view that after however many thousands or millions of years there has been life on this earth that we suddenly have a few hundred scientists who say we have 20 years to save the world. Its much more realistic to think they have a bigger political and economic agenda than a real concern to encourage the global community to be more thoughtful in its stewardship of the vast resources we have at our disposal on this planet we call home.
I admit to not knowing too much about the specific goals of Kyoto and I probably should correct that. Typically broad political documents are hardly worth the paper they’re written on in terms of how closely the governments that sign them actually follow the directions that are outlined.
Lets compare our carbon footprints one of these days. Other than the fact our house is too big for us I think were not that different.
Thank you very much for the effort you made to respond. I really appreciated it. I always enjoy and respect the thoughtful opinions you have about the world around you.

Love,
Dad
Here is the research I came up with
Simultaneous warming on Earth and Mars suggests that our planet's recent climate changes have a natural—and not a human-induced—cause, according to one scientist's controversial theory.
Earth is currently experiencing rapid warming, which the vast majority of climate scientists says is due to humans pumping huge amounts of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.


RELATED
Climate Change Predictions Not Exaggerated, Analysis Says (February 1, 2007)
New Mars Pictures Show Signs of Watery "Aquifers" (February 16, 2007)
Photo Gallery: Global Warming
Mars, too, appears to be enjoying more mild and balmy temperatures.
In 2005 data from NASA's Mars Global Surveyor and Odyssey missions revealed that the carbon dioxide "ice caps" near Mars's south pole had been diminishing for three summers in a row.
Habibullo Abdussamatov, head of space research at St. Petersburg's Pulkovo Astronomical Observatory in Russia, says the Mars data is evidence that the current global warming on Earth is being caused by changes in the sun.
"The long-term increase in solar irradiance is heating both Earth and Mars," he said.
Solar Cycles
Abdussamatov believes that changes in the sun's heat output can account for almost all the climate changes we see on both planets.
Mars and Earth, for instance, have experienced periodic ice ages throughout their histories.
"Man-made greenhouse warming has made a small contribution to the warming seen on Earth in recent years, but it cannot compete with the increase in solar irradiance," Abdussamatov said.
By studying fluctuations in the warmth of the sun, Abdussamatov believes he can see a pattern that fits with the ups and downs in climate we see on Earth and Mars.

All planets experience a few wobbles as they make their journey around the sun. Earth's wobbles are known as Milankovitch cycles and occur on time scales of between 20,000 and 100,000 years.
These fluctuations change the tilt of Earth's axis and its distance from the sun and are thought to be responsible for the waxing and waning of ice ages on Earth.
Mars and Earth wobble in different ways, and most scientists think it is pure coincidence that both planets are between ice ages right now.
"Mars has no [large] moon, which makes its wobbles much larger, and hence the swings in climate are greater too,"

Perhaps the biggest stumbling block in Abdussamatov's theory is his dismissal of the greenhouse effect, in which atmospheric gases such as carbon dioxide help keep heat trapped near the planet's surface.
He claims that carbon dioxide has only a small influence on Earth's climate and virtually no influence on Mars.
But "without the greenhouse effect there would be very little, if any, life on Earth, since our planet would pretty much be a big ball of ice," said Evan, of the University of Wisconsin.
Most scientists now fear that the massive amount of carbon dioxide humans are pumping into the air will lead to a catastrophic rise in Earth's temperatures, dramatically raising sea levels as glaciers melt and leading to extreme weather worldwide.
Abdussamatov remains contrarian, however, suggesting that the sun holds something quite different in store.
"The solar irradiance began to drop in the 1990s, and a minimum will be reached by approximately 2040," Abdussamatov said. "It will cause a steep cooling of the climate on Earth in 15 to 20 years."


Benny Peiser, a social anthropologist at Liverpool John Moores University who monitors studies and news reports of asteroids, global warming and other potentially apocalyptic topics, recently quoted in his daily electronic newsletter the following from a blog called Strata-Sphere:
“Global warming on Neptune's moon Triton as well as Jupiter and Pluto, and now Mars has some [scientists] scratching their heads over what could possibly be in common with the warming of all these planets ... Could there be something in common with all the planets in our solar system that might cause them all to warm at the same time?”
Peiser included quotes from recent news articles that take up other aspects of the idea.
“I think it is an intriguing coincidence that warming trends have been observed on a number of very diverse planetary bodies in our solar system,” Peiser said in an email interview. “Perhaps this is just a fluke.”
In fact, scientists have alternative explanations for the anomalous warming on each of these other planetary bodies.
The warming on Triton, for example, could be the result of an extreme southern summer on the moon, a season that occurs every few hundred years, as well as possible changes in the makeup of surface ice that caused it to absorb more of the Sun’s heat.
Researchers credited Pluto’s warming to possible eruptive activity and a delayed thawing from its last close approach to the Sun in 1989.
And the recent storm activity on Jupiter is being blamed on a recurring climatic cycle that churns up material from the gas giant’s interior and lofts it to the surface, where it is heated by the Sun.
Sun does vary
The radiation output of the Sun does fluctuate over the course of its 11-year solar cycle. But the change is only about one-tenth of 1 percent—not substantial enough to affect Earth’s climate in dramatic ways, and certainly not enough to be the sole culprit of our planet’s current warming trend, scientists say.
“The small measured changes in solar output and variations from one decade to the next are only on the order of a fraction of a percent, and if you do the calculations not even large enough to really provide a detectable signal in the surface temperature record,” said Penn State meteorologist Michael Mann.
The link between solar activity and global warming is just another scapegoat for human-caused warming, Mann told LiveScience.
“Solar activity continues to be one of the last bastions of contrarians,” Mann said. “People who don’t accept the existence of anthropogenic climate change still try to point to solar activity.”
The Maunder Minimum
This is not to say that solar fluctuations never influence Earth’s climate in substantial ways. During a 75-year period beginning in 1645, astronomers detected almost no sunspot activity on the Sun. Called the “Maunder Minimum,” this event coincided with the coldest part of the Little Ice Age, a 350-year cold spell that gripped much of Europe and North America.
Recent studies have cast doubt on this relationship, however. New estimates of the total change in the brightness of the Sun during the Maunder Minimum suggest it was only fractions of a percent, and perhaps not enough to create the global cooling commonly attributed to it.
“The situation is pretty ambiguous,” said David Rind, a senior climate researcher at NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, who has modeled the Maunder Minimum.
Based on current estimates, even if another Maunder Minimum were to occur, it might result in an average temperature decrease of about 2 degrees Fahrenheit, Rind said.
This would still not be enough to counteract warming of between 2 to 12 degrees Fahrenheit from greenhouse gases by 2100, as predicted by the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report.
LiveScience staff writer Andrea Thompson contributed to this article.



Neptune is the planet farthest from the Sun (Pluto is now considered only a dwarf planet), Neptune is the planet farthest from the Earth, and to our knowledge, there has been absolutely no industrialization out at Neptune in recent centuries. There has been no recent build-up of greenhouse gases there, no deforestation, no rapid urbanization, no increase in contrails from jet airplanes, and no increase in ozone in the low atmosphere; recent changes at Neptune could never be blamed on any human influence. Incredibly, an article has appeared in a recent issue of Geophysical Research Letters showing a stunning relationship between the solar output, Neptune’s brightness, and heaven forbid, the temperature of the Earth. With its obvious implications to the greenhouse debate, we are certain you have never heard of the work and never will outside World Climate Report.
In case you have forgotten your basic science lessons on the planets, Neptune orbits the Sun at a distance 30 times the distance from the Earth to the Sun and Neptune revolves around the Sun once every 164.8 Earth years. Neptune has 17 times the mass of the Earth, its atmosphere is primarily composed of hydrogen and helium, with traces of methane that account for the planet’s distinctive blue appearance. It was the only planet discovered mathematically – scientists noted variations in the orbit of Uranus, they calculated the orbit and position of a yet undiscovered planet that could cause the variations noted for Uranus, they determined where the planet should be, and on the first night they searched for it (September 23, 1846), they discovered the large planet sitting within 1 degree of their predictions. The new planet was named for Neptune, Roman god of the sea, given its distinctive blue color. Observations from Earth and a 1989 Voyager 2 flyby have revealed that Neptune’s cloud tops are extremely cold (−346°F) being so far from the Sun while the center of the planet has a temperature of 13,000°F due to high pressure generating extremely hot gases.
In the recent article, Hammel and Lockwood, from the Space Science Institute in Colorado and the Lowell Observatory, note that measurements of visible light from Neptune have been taken at the Lowell Observatory in Flagstaff, Arizona since 1950. Obviously, light from Neptune can be related to seasons on the planet, small variations in Neptune’s orbit, the apparent tilt of the axis as viewed from the Earth, the varying distance from Neptune to Earth, and of course, changes in the atmosphere near the Lowell Observatory. Astronomers are clever, they are fully aware of these complications, and they adjust the measurements accordingly.
As seen in Figure 1, Neptune has been getting brighter since around 1980; furthermore, infrared measurements of the planet since 1980 show that the planet has been warming steadily from 1980 to 2004. As they say on Neptune, global warming has become an inconvenient truth. But with no one to blame, Hammel and Lockwood explored how variations in the output of the Sun might control variations in the brightness of Neptune.
Figure 1 (a) represents the corrected visible light from Neptune from 1950 to 2006; (b) shows the temperature anomalies of the Earth; (c) shows the total solar irradiance as a percent variation by year; (d) shows the ultraviolet emission from the Sun (Source: Hammel and Lockwood (2007)).
What would seem so simple statistically is complicated by the degrees of freedom in the various time series which is related to the serial correlation in the data (e.g., next year’s value is highly dependent on this year’s value). Nonetheless, they find that the correlation coefficient between solar irradiance and Neptune’s brightness is near 0.90 (1.00 is perfect). The same relationship is found between the Earth’s temperature anomalies and the solar output. Hammel and Lockwood note “In other words, the Earth temperature values are as well correlated with solar irradiance (r = 0.89) as they are with Neptune’s blue brightness (r > 0.90), assuming a 10-year lag of the Neptune values.” The temporal lag is needed to account for the large mass of Neptune that would require years to adjust to any changes in solar output.
Hammel and Lockwood conclude that “In summary, if Neptune’s atmosphere is indeed responding to some variation in solar activity in a manner similar to that of the Earth albeit with a temporal lag” then “Neptune may provide an independent (and extraterrestrial) locale for studies of solar effects on planetary atmospheres.”
World Climate Report has covered many articles in the scientific literature showing that variations in solar output, including variations within specific wavelengths (e.g., cosmic, ultraviolet, visible, infrared) are highly correlated with temperature variations near the Earth’s surface. Believe it or not, when the Sun is more energetic and putting out more energy, the Earth tends to warm up, and when the Sun cools down, so does the Earth. The Hammel and Lockwood article reveals that the same is true out at Neptune; when the Sun’s energy increases, Neptune seems to warm up and get brighter given a decade lag.
If for some reason you do not believe that the Sun is a significant player in determining the temperature of the Earth (after all, we are told repeatedly that humans are causing most of the observed warming on the Earth), then asked yourself if you believe that Neptune’s temperature is controlled by the Sun. How is it possible that the Earth’s temperature is so highly correlated with brightness variations from Neptune? The news from Neptune comes to us just weeks after an article was published showing that Mars has warmed recently as well.
If nothing else, we have certainly learned recently that planets undergo changes in their mean temperature, and while we can easily blame human activity here on the Earth, blaming humans for the recent warming on Mars and Neptune would be an astronomical stretch, to say the least.
Reference:
Hammel, H. B., and G. W. Lockwood, 2007. Suggestive correlations between the brightness of Neptune, solar variability, and Earth’s temperature, Geophysical Research Letters, 34, L08203, doi:10.1029/2006GL028764.














Other planets are warming up too.Well, the thing is that it is not only "Mars" and "Pluto" that are warming, but pretty much every planet, and moon with an atmosphere in the solar system is warming/undergoing climate change, and in most cases what is happening to every planet in the solar system, is worse than what is happening on Earth.
Global Warming on Pluto.http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/pluto_warming_02100...
Climate change/warming on Jupiter.http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/space/2006-05-04-jup...
Global warming on Triton. (Neptune's largest moon)http://www.scienceagogo.com/news/19980526052143data_trunc...
Global warming on Enceladus. (A moon of Saturn)http://www.sciencenewsforkids.org/articles/20060419/Featu...
Climate change on Saturn.http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6135450.stm...