Should we blame the sun for global warming?

Climate change has been a topical issue over the last few years. It has enjoyed overwhelming prominence not because it is an uncommon occurrence but because of its potential adverse consequences. Though humanity acknowledges the reality of climate change, there are those who have attempted to solely attribute this phenomenon to what we do here on earth while vehemently wishing to silence those who hold unorthodox views that nature dictates the cause of humanity. A similar intellectual bullying occurred when the debate around the link between HIV and Aids was in full swing a few years back.

What we should all acknowledge is that climate change is the result of both human and natural causes, though not in equal measure. The question we must ask is why the human causes are over-amplified when science seems to suggest that natural causes have more devastating effects to civilisation or humanity in general. It is important that we should curb greenhouse gas emissions but will that cause an abrupt end to climate change? The answer is NO!

The ice age was not caused by human activity on earth. Sages of our time and those before us say it was influenced by changes in the ocean circulation arising from the earth’s orbital variation. We have now transitioned to the warm age. There are scientists who tell us that ocean currents do carry heat from the tropical zones (Cancer and Capricorn) to the two poles, North and South. This melts the the ice caps at these poles. As the ice melts the pressure holding the tectonic plates is gradually reduced and allows them to move and as a consequence we endure devastating natural disasters such as floods, tsunamis and earthquakes. We have seen a recurrence of earthquakes in Guatemala, Argentina and Venezuela in one week since the horror of Haiti.

A further consequence of the melting ice caps is the altering the earth’s axis of rotation. What we know is that the earth’s orbital variation does lead to climate change. Science teaches us that the tilt of the earth causes the seasons. We have summer when the earth is tilted towards the sun and winter when it tilts away from the sun.

A French mathematician, Joseph Alphonse Adhemar (1797–1862), in his 1842 book Revolutions of the Sea was first to suggest that the ice age was caused by a variation in the earth’s orbit around the sun. Adhemar’s views were later improved upon by the Yugoslav mathematician Milutin Milankovitch after whom the Milankovitch Theory was named. He observed that there are three types of variation in the earth’s orbit around the sun, which had an impact on the global climate. According to Milankovitch these three variations together affect “the total amount of sunlight received by the earth and distribution of that sunlight at different latitudes and at different times”.

Charles Hapgood (1904-1982) in his books Earth’s Shifting Crust (1958) and Path of the Pole (1970) also built on Adhemar’s observations. The renowned theoretical physicist Albert Einstein (1879-1955) before his death wrote a foreword to Hapgood’s book and said:

“A great many empirical data indicate that at each point on the earth’s surface that has been carefully studied, many climatic changes have taken place, apparently quite suddenly. This, according to Hapgood, is explicable if the virtually rigid outer crust of the earth undergoes, from time to time, extensive displacement over the viscous, plastic, possibly fluid inner layers. Such displacements may take place as the consequence of comparatively slight forces exerted on the crust, derived from the earth’s momentum of rotation, which in turn will tend to alter the axis of rotation, which in turn will tend to alter the axis of rotation of the earth’s crust.”

In 2009 Nasa released a report titled “Severe Space Weather Events — Understanding Societal and Economic Impacts” which dealt with the consequences of solar flares that could disrupt earth’s magnetic field and alter the axis of rotation of the earth’s crust. Solar flares emit radiation where “25% of it is absorbed by the atmosphere and 25% is reflected by the clouds back into space. The remaining radiation travels unimpeded to the earth and heats its surface”.

That the sun affects the earth’s climate systems is not rocket science and we cannot ignore the adverse impact of the sun’s activity on climate patterns on earth. There are scientists who hold an unpopular view that the cause of global warming is a direct result of the output of this solar energy from the sun. There exists empirical evidence that supports their view but perhaps not to a great degree.

These solar flares are noted during increased sun activity and that is when there exist a greater number of sunspots — dark sports on the surface of the sun. Sunspots were first observed by Galileo in 1610. In the period 1645 to 1715 scientists observed a strange occurrence where sunspots disappeared and this coincided with the “little ice age” where Northern Europe endured protracted, bitter-cold weather. Between 1900 and 1950 the earth’s temperature increased and coincidentally that was during the period of increased sunspot activity. The fact is that the sun’s temperature rises considerably when there are sunspots.

It appears that the relationship between sever solar radiation and the shift in the earth’s axis of rotation cannot be contested. Can we then dismiss with absolute confidence as absurd that climate change can largely be attributed to natural causes? What could be the motive of scientists for emphasising the inconsequential contribution of humans to climate change and not natural causes? Surely we cannot solely attribute this phenomenon of the melting ice caps to greenhouse emissions. Why are pre-eminent scientists at the centre of the climate change debate undermining the sun’s effect on climate change?

Humanity is facing the greatest challenge of responding to the devastating consequences of nature. The Mayan prophecy has been downplayed largely by those holding political office despite empirical science supporting its veracity. The Mayans accurately predicted solar and lunar eclipses in the past and their predictions of the earth being in exact alignment with the sun and the centre of our Milky Way galaxy has not enjoyed much prominence from authorities. No government would want to confirm the veracity of apocalyptic predictions and send the public into immediate panic. According to the Nasa report: “The impacts of severe space weather events go beyond disruption of existing technical systems and can lead to short- and long-term, collateral socio-economic disruptions and problems.”

When the brown smelly bits hit the fan, authorities will look towards us and impose collective guilt as having done little to reduce greenhouse emissions and save humanity from extinction. Without being defeatist we must acknowledge that a battle against nature has only one casualty — humanity!