Skip to main content

Reply to comment

Read the article, Darren

July 16, 2007 by Fred Bortz, 2 years 19 weeks ago
Comment: 24249

The New Scientist article addresses this, but I guess you'd rather spout than read.

Here's another quote from it, summarizing the findings, which include sunspots, cosmic rays, and solar irradiance:

"The upshot is that somewhere between 1985 and 1987 all the solar factors that could have affected climate have been going in the wrong direction. If they were really a big factor we would have cooling by now," Lockwood told New Scientist. He adds that he wishes he knew why the Sun's activity had changed in this way.

I welcome constructive comments, which is why I requested that you read the New Scientist article (if not the original journal article) before joining the discussion. Darren, if you read it, you clearly missed most of what it said.

Fred Bortz -- Science and technology books for young readers (www.fredbortz.com) and Science book reviews (www.scienceshelf.com)

Reply

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <p> <sub> <blockquote> <br> <hspace> <img> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <width> <height> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options



About us

Science Blog was started in August 2002. It lives, breathes and eats press releases from research organizations around the globe. Most of what you read here are press releases from the outfits named in the stories themselves. Got a news story you think belongs here? Let's talk. The other half of the equation is blog posts from readers like you. So if you have an interest in science, please register and join others like you in an ongoing, vibrant dialog about what makes the world tick. Meantime, please take a minute to read our Privacy Policy and Site Disclaimer.


Premium Drupal Themes by Adaptivethemes