<p>Since 1950 surface temperatures have risen significantly even though the total radiant energy from the Sun has been decreasing over this same period. To the best of my current understanding as long as these two graphs are accurate this makes it game over for the climate change deniers.</p>
<p><strong>Is there any climate science explanation for the significant increase in surface temperatures corresponding to a decrease in radiant energy besides severe anthropogenic heating?</strong></p>
<p><a href="https://climate.nasa.gov/faq/14/is-the-sun-causing-global-warming/?fbclid=IwAR2d6RW0KpLXRifAU4hZPbEjXVLnRcLRshw233gGJW--47tl0NfdY7JMTyk" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://climate.nasa.gov/faq/14/is-the-sun-causing-global-warming/?fbclid=IwAR2d6RW0KpLXRifAU4hZPbEjXVLnRcLRshw233gGJW--47tl0NfdY7JMTyk</a></p>
<p><a href="https://i.sstatic.net/xoBQ7.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/xoBQ7.png" alt="enter image description here" /></a></p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-11-20T15:00:48.823Z
@BarryCarter Most people understand that a stratified random sample can accurately measure the population https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/howcan-a-poll-of-only-100/?fbclid=IwAR2SC87Ekyjlh6FsXpNN50dQmEBabIXpK_WDBQ3l2rYd7LZ0-ImsJZJjtIs
polcott
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-11-20T15:04:31.813Z
@BarryCarter The yearly data is shown as the very fine lines that jump up and down.
polcott
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-11-20T15:08:37.177Z
@DavidHammen I am striving to find the very most effective way to succinctly refute global heating denier liars so that the actual skeptics can be won over to the truth. Currently 33% of Americans do not believe that global heating is even occurring. 67% of Americans with a bachelors degree of better believe that global heating caused by humans is a serious problem.
polcott
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-11-20T16:14:16.967Z
@BarryCarter There is always a best thing we can do. I am looking for the best thing we can do to convince the actual skeptics.
polcott
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-11-20T16:17:04.753Z
@BarryCarter A sample of temperatures does not have to be random as long as it is representative.  It is not like the temperatures are going to have subtly  differing opinions.
polcott
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-11-20T19:22:27.910Z
@BarryCarter We take random sub samples of the random samples and see how much variance that we get.
polcott
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-11-20T19:54:46.733Z
@BarryCarter I think that part of the discussion has already been talked through. Hardly anyone believes that the data is unreliable for statistical reasons. They either believe that it is statistically reliable or totally faked.
polcott
<climate-change>
Is there any climate science explanation for this graph besides severe anthropogenic heating?
polcott
# Is there any climate science explanation for this graph besides severe anthropogenic heating?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2019-11-19)

Since 1950 surface temperatures have risen significantly even though the total radiant energy from the Sun has been decreasing over this same period. To the best of my current understanding as long as these two graphs are accurate this makes it game over for the climate change deniers.

**Is there any climate science explanation for the significant increase in surface temperatures corresponding to a decrease in radiant energy besides severe anthropogenic heating?**

<https://climate.nasa.gov/faq/14/is-the-sun-causing-global-warming/?fbclid=IwAR2d6RW0KpLXRifAU4hZPbEjXVLnRcLRshw233gGJW--47tl0NfdY7JMTyk>

[![enter image description here](https://i.sstatic.net/xoBQ7.png)](https://i.sstatic.net/xoBQ7.png)

**Tags:** climate-change

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: @BarryCarter Most people understand that a stratified random sample can accurately measure the population https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/howcan-a-poll-of-only-100/?fbclid=IwAR2SC87Ekyjlh6FsXpNN50dQmEBabIXpK_WDBQ3l2rYd7LZ0-ImsJZJjtIs  
> **username_0**: @BarryCarter The yearly data is shown as the very fine lines that jump up and down.  
> **username_0**: @DavidHammen I am striving to find the very most effective way to succinctly refute global heating denier liars so that the actual skeptics can be won over to the truth. Currently 33% of Americans do not believe that global heating is even occurring. 67% of Americans with a bachelors degree of better believe that global heating caused by humans is a serious problem.  
> **username_0**: @BarryCarter There is always a best thing we can do. I am looking for the best thing we can do to convince the actual skeptics.  
> **username_0**: @BarryCarter A sample of temperatures does not have to be random as long as it is representative.  It is not like the temperatures are going to have subtly  differing opinions.  
> **username_0**: @BarryCarter We take random sub samples of the random samples and see how much variance that we get.  
> **username_0**: @BarryCarter I think that part of the discussion has already been talked through. Hardly anyone believes that the data is unreliable for statistical reasons. They either believe that it is statistically reliable or totally faked.  

---

## 0 answers

