>Note: Google Groups now says that it does not support sending messages
>to sci.environment, despite the fact that I sent my previous messages
>to it; hence I am only posting this message to the other four groups.

>On 11 Aug, 15:20, "V for Vendicar"
><Execute_The_Traitor_In_The_White_Ho...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> "Peter Muehlbauer" <spamtrap...@AT.frankenexpress.de> wrote
>> > TSI is significantly involved in temperature increase and decrease.

>>   How sad for you that the total energy output from the sun (TSI) has
>> decreased over the last 20-30 years as the earth's temperature has been
>> rising.

>Well, I just googled "total energy output from the sun TSI" (without
>quotes) and the first item that came up was a March 2003 SPACE.COM
>article entitled "Sun's Output Increasing in Possible Trend Fueling
>Global Warming" (http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/
>sun_output_030320.html).

>The first paragraph says "In what could be the simplest explanation
>for one component of global warming, a new study shows the Sun's
>radiation has increased by .05 percent per decade since the late
>1970s.", which rather contradicts your assertion.

>What is perhaps more significant is a graph showing "Northern
>Hemisphere Land Temperature and Solar Cycle", with an "Astrophysical
>Journal" source and showing temperatures clearly decreasing over a
>period of 30 years or so (quite possibly 1943-74 which Fran
>mentioned). The graphs in the Wikpedia pages (http://en.wikipedia.org/
>wiki/Global_dimming and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_temperature_record)
>show cooling from 1940-50, particularly looking at 5-year averages,
>and no noticeable cooling in the subsequent decades. Those Wikipedia
>graphs are clearly a fabrication; I can't see how an ice age could
>seriously have been predicted in the 1970s if it hadn't actually got
>colder in the previous 20 years!

>Does anybody know of any graphs for southern hemisphere temperatures,
>which I have heard haven't actually increased when northern hemisphere
>ones have?

>Maybe I haven't browsed as many science websites as others, mainly
>getting information from mainstream media and New Scientist (which
>incidentally had a small item recently predicting cooling over the
>next decade!) However, it is difficult to distinguish disinformation
>from the truth with big vested interests at stake, so I prefer to put
>my views on public forums such as these and let both sides put their
>views forward and we'll see who wins the argument. I'm perfectly
>prepared to change my position and support the global warming
>consensus if there's strong enough evidence for it.