The sun has nothing to do with the current climate changes

GW zealots have always had serious problem with science. Not only do they ignore nowadays science, but they also pretend that over 60 years there have not been heliobiolgy and other sciences involved in Sun-Earth links study that clearly proved the simple fact that all the terrestrial physical and biological processes are subjected to the Sun.
From here:
"change in the UV radiation of the Sun is much
greater than in the range of visible radiation. The UV range of the
[electromagnetic] spectrum lies between ...

The sun has nothing to do with the current climate changes

GW zealots have always had serious problem with science. Not only do they ignore nowadays science, but they also pretend that over 60 years there have not been heliobiolgy and other sciences involved in Sun-Earth links study that clearly proved the simple fact that all the terrestrial physical and biological processes are subjected to the Sun.
From here:
"change in the UV radiation of the Sun is much
greater than in the range of visible radiation. The UV range of the
[electromagnetic] spectrum lies between 100Å and 3800Å. Wavelengths
below 1500Å are called extreme ultraviolet, EUV. The variation in
radiation between extrema of the 11-year sunspot cycle reaches 35% in
the EUV range, 20% at 1500Å and 7% around 2500Å. At wavelengths above
2500Å, the variation reaches still 2%. At the time of energetic solar
eruptions, UV radiation increases up to 16%."
Where are these variations taken into account in the models that predict what they assume, namely, 'global warming'?
"There
is not even an attempt to model such complex climate details, as GCMs
are too coarse for such purposes. When K. Hasselmann (a leading
greenhouse protagonist) was asked why GCMs do not allow for the
stratosphere's warming by the sun's ultraviolet radiation and its
impact on the circulation in the troposphere, he answered: "This aspect
is too complex to incorporate it into the models."

willhelm, one suspects that you are naturally slack jawed. Don't blame it on me.

How can I if there has not been warming in the last 10 years

Are you kidding me? The loss of the glaciers? The loss of the polar caps in which ships are now traversing in the summer time because enough is melting to clear a path for them to save trip time?

Of course you claim of no warming in the last 10 years falls on yet ANOTHER usage of psuedoscience in that claim is based on the HIGHEST RECORD set in 1998. Of course, if tempuratures don't beat the record then ...

willhelm, one suspects that you are naturally slack jawed. Don't blame it on me.

How can I if there has not been warming in the last 10 years

Are you kidding me? The loss of the glaciers? The loss of the polar caps in which ships are now traversing in the summer time because enough is melting to clear a path for them to save trip time?

Of course you claim of no warming in the last 10 years falls on yet ANOTHER usage of psuedoscience in that claim is based on the HIGHEST RECORD set in 1998. Of course, if tempuratures don't beat the record then you can skew the data and say that temperatures have discontinued to rise - of course that requires that one ignore the fact that the AVERAGE temperature continues to increase and temps are still setting record monthly highs across the globe.

And of course you are misssing the point that this year alone seen global monthly temperatures reaching in the top 10 rankings

But I'm sure you won't let the facts distort your ramblings. Continue to cherry pick the findings you want to validate your denial and open up your parka shops for your predicted cold wave.

Show me a positive trend in global temperatures of the last decade. Show me how GW gamblers explained the glaciers' retreat in the 10,000 years before you fell for their scam. Show me the trend in Antarctic Ice for last 30 years. Show me ice-free Arctic in 2008 as it was promised to be. Show me a positive trend in tornado/hurricanes that was also promised. Show me the trend in victims out of natural disasters for the last Century while GW was underway. Show me a single successful forecast made by your GW religion.

Telling me about July temperatures is sheer cherry-picking. To make up the heat take a look:

Winter-like weekend for eastern USA - 16 Oct 09
Record snowfall in Pennsylvania 16 ...

Show me a positive trend in global temperatures of the last decade. Show me how GW gamblers explained the glaciers' retreat in the 10,000 years before you fell for their scam. Show me the trend in Antarctic Ice for last 30 years. Show me ice-free Arctic in 2008 as it was promised to be. Show me a positive trend in tornado/hurricanes that was also promised. Show me the trend in victims out of natural disasters for the last Century while GW was underway. Show me a single successful forecast made by your GW religion.

Telling me about July temperatures is sheer cherry-picking. To make up the heat take a look:

Winter-like weekend for eastern USA - 16 Oct 09
Record snowfall in Pennsylvania 16 Oct 09
Earliest snow on record in Pennsylvania 16 Oct 09
Shattering cold records all over Central Washington, Northern Idaho, much of Montana and portions of Oregon - Snow on the way - 12 Oct 09
Czech Republic: Most snow in 100 years - 16 Oct 09
Earliest October Snowfall on record in Southern Germany - 15 Oct 09
Major snow in Austria - 15 Oct 09
Winter arrives early in Germany - 13 Oct 09
Low temp records shattered in Alberta - 12 Oct 09
Record lows in B.C. - 10 Oct 09
Record low temperatures in 21 states - 11 Oct 09
300 record lows (including 41 that had stood for 100+years)
Record low temperatures in 18 states (174 records)

Right, that picture? Why don't you question these creatures about what they thought of the ending of the ice age in New York :

Insectivora (shrews and moles)
Arctic Shrew (still found in MN and WI)
Northern Water Shrew (still found in MN and WI)
Starnose Mole (still found in MN and WI)
Hairytail Mole

Edentata (sloths, armadillos, and anteaters)
Ground Sloths (extinct)
Carnivora (lions, tigers, and bears)
Short-faced Skunk (extinct)
Dire Wolf (extinct)
Short-faced Bear (extinct)
American Lion (extinct)
Jaguar
Saber-toothed Cats (extinct)
Rodentia (squirrels, rats,...

Right, that picture? Why don't you question these creatures about what they thought of the ending of the ice age in New York :

Insectivora (shrews and moles)
Arctic Shrew (still found in MN and WI)
Northern Water Shrew (still found in MN and WI)
Starnose Mole (still found in MN and WI)
Hairytail Mole

Edentata (sloths, armadillos, and anteaters)
Ground Sloths (extinct)
Carnivora (lions, tigers, and bears)
Short-faced Skunk (extinct)
Dire Wolf (extinct)
Short-faced Bear (extinct)
American Lion (extinct)
Jaguar
Saber-toothed Cats (extinct)
Rodentia (squirrels, rats, mice and beavers)
Giant Beaver (extinct)
Northern Grasshopper Mouse
Northern Bog Lemming
Mountain (Heather) Phenacomys
Boreal Redback Vole
Yellow-cheeked Vole
Porcupine
Lagomorpha (rabbits and hares)
Snowshoe Hare (still found in MN and WI)
Perissodactlya (horses, rhinos, and tapirs)
Horses (extinct in North America)
Tapirs (extinct in North America)
Artiodactyla (deer, cows, sheep, camels, and pigs)
Peccaries (extinct)
Stag-moose (extinct)
Bison
Musk Ox (some types extinct)
Proboscidea (elephants)
American Mastodon (extinct)
Mammoths (extinct)

Oh wait, they became extince after the ice age and the climate radically changed.

As for the proof, I think not. It's you making the claim that reality is wrong. The glaciers are melting, the sea levels are rising, ships are now finding shipping lanes through the polar regions that never exisdted before. The poles are warming, harvest belts are steadily moving north as the temperatures increase across the globe setting off record warm temperatures globally.

Why don't you get off your dufff and do a little leg work proving your claim that the planet isn't warming. Your sun clip is based on some wacko pseudo-scientific research that every other scientists laughs at. I'm sure next you'll say its cycles, or volcanoes, or interstellar rays, or some other nonsense that has zer...

As for the proof, I think not. It's you making the claim that reality is wrong. The glaciers are melting, the sea levels are rising, ships are now finding shipping lanes through the polar regions that never exisdted before. The poles are warming, harvest belts are steadily moving north as the temperatures increase across the globe setting off record warm temperatures globally.

Why don't you get off your dufff and do a little leg work proving your claim that the planet isn't warming. Your sun clip is based on some wacko pseudo-scientific research that every other scientists laughs at. I'm sure next you'll say its cycles, or volcanoes, or interstellar rays, or some other nonsense that has zero evidence to back it up.

The planet is warming. That is a fact. There has been no 10 year cooling trend. That's cherry picked fantasy. Time to grow up and accept that your zealotry is misplaced.

Richard Lindzen - He has been a critic of some global warming theories, however Lindzen agrees with about 90% of what other climate scientists are saying

In 2001, Lindzen published a paper speculating that as the Earth warmed, water vapor would decrease in the upper atmosphere, allowing heat to escape back into space more efficiently, and thereby reducing overall temperature.

The paper met with vigorous criticism. Eventually, he disavowed the idea. “That was an old view,” Lindzen said about his five-year-old hypothesis. “I find it insane that I am still forced to explain this.”

His most recent Wall Street Journal editorial, for example, includes admissions that the Earth has warmed...

Richard Lindzen - He has been a critic of some global warming theories, however Lindzen agrees with about 90% of what other climate scientists are saying

In 2001, Lindzen published a paper speculating that as the Earth warmed, water vapor would decrease in the upper atmosphere, allowing heat to escape back into space more efficiently, and thereby reducing overall temperature.

The paper met with vigorous criticism. Eventually, he disavowed the idea. “That was an old view,” Lindzen said about his five-year-old hypothesis. “I find it insane that I am still forced to explain this.”

His most recent Wall Street Journal editorial, for example, includes admissions that the Earth has warmed over the last century, that humans are influencing the climate, that CO2 is a greenhouse gas and that its levels continue to rise.

Are you really confident that all earth creatures were born while the Earth was under glaciation and that warming was what destroyed life forms? Also, was it CO2 that destroyed ceased last glaciation? My jaw is really dropping out of your illiteracy. Was not it in the Tertiary Period (Eocene-Paleocene thermal maximum, see at this real warm time) when mammals (camels, mastodons, horses, ground sloths, armadillos, saber tooth cats, giant wolves, giant beavers, giant bears) began a bright evolution in North and South America??? Was not it glacial cold 1,600,000 years ago that pushed the first mammoths to emigr...

Are you really confident that all earth creatures were born while the Earth was under glaciation and that warming was what destroyed life forms? Also, was it CO2 that destroyed ceased last glaciation? My jaw is really dropping out of your illiteracy. Was not it in the Tertiary Period (Eocene-Paleocene thermal maximum, see at this real warm time) when mammals (camels, mastodons, horses, ground sloths, armadillos, saber tooth cats, giant wolves, giant beavers, giant bears) began a bright evolution in North and South America??? Was not it glacial cold 1,600,000 years ago that pushed the first mammoths to emigrate to North America from Asia during one of the low stands of sea level???

All support human influenced warming. i can't help it if you are too lazy to do your own homework. The best either of you can do? Trout out the already disclaimed "list of scientists with PHD" argument. Ignoring the fact that while their small minds stagger at the idea that a few thousand scientists (the vast majority of which have already been exposed as pseudoscience nutjobs) signed the petition they make up less than 10% of the entirety of scientists.

And of course willy fails to present the proof of his claims that ships through the frozen poles in the 20th century. Then followed by his idiot brother admitting to the fact of global warming (most likely because past idiotic claims again...

All support human influenced warming. i can't help it if you are too lazy to do your own homework. The best either of you can do? Trout out the already disclaimed "list of scientists with PHD" argument. Ignoring the fact that while their small minds stagger at the idea that a few thousand scientists (the vast majority of which have already been exposed as pseudoscience nutjobs) signed the petition they make up less than 10% of the entirety of scientists.

And of course willy fails to present the proof of his claims that ships through the frozen poles in the 20th century. Then followed by his idiot brother admitting to the fact of global warming (most likely because past idiotic claims against have been so heavily disabused) but still holding out that its cause is not found in humanity.

I've given all you asked and neither of you nit wits have accepted the cold facts and failed to produce one whit of proof against - yet all the while pushing an argument by mirroring your own failings on me.

Not once has either of you used anything more then the same old tired rhetoric and failed claim examples and go so far as to ignore the fact that even those have been proven incorrect.

And to just put the cherry on the cake, they argue against GW, quote a source that supports it, and then treat it like Lindsen is a full denier.

Idiots, the pair.