The Faint Sun Paradox

You can easily Google for articles like:

“Faint young Sun problem more severe due to ice-albedo feedback and higher rotation rate of the early Earth”

That a faster rotating planet should be colder in otherwise same circumstances, is a naive, wrong and stupid assumption.

In fact, a FASTER rotating planet should be HOTTER as well. Make no mistake about it!

There is a sober minority out there, which knows this elementary fact. I’ve mentioned it here before. The so called scientific community, however, is either ignorant of this problem, or compliant with this mistake, lie or whatever it is.

Why is this so important? Because, science should be truthful and not a lie designed for who knows what purpose. Perhaps to support the Warmers’ agenda, which substantially relies on this basic error.

If you wonder why it was so warm 150 million years ago, with a tropical paradise almost everywhere, you should know that the shorter Earth’s day is chiefly to thank. Not carbon dioxide, which was sometimes less and sometimes more abundant than today.

In fact, there is no paradox here at all!



2 thoughts on “The Faint Sun Paradox

  1. msjr says:

    There is another big problem with all these models, there is a substantial error ratio. I would propose that in start of every article there would be warning: “this model is based on many undefined variables” or something like this. One could easily say that earth was closer to the sun then, the model has the same undefined basis.

    Just to add some of my thougts… Yes, let’s watch those islands sinking and nobody mentioning that it’s a simple geological process and not the sea rising. And yes, let’s see how all weather sites will be wrong again with 14 day weather predictions and yes let’s bow to the scientists scaring us with their long term models….

    • Yes, the Earth was closer to the Sun and the Earth was spinning faster than today. The year as well as the day were shorter than today. Both increased the temperature on Earth, thus compensating for the fainter Sun.

      All these should be mentioned on Wikipedia. However, the closer proximity to the Sun is not equally well measured. We know exactly how long the day was 150 million years ago, we are less sure how much closer exactly to the Sun Earth was. Only that it was closer.

      Here I am simply pointing out one factor, namely spinning velocity to surface temperature, which is exactly the opposite of what “the Cathedral” wants us to believe.

      I mean, it is quite an elementary physical exercise to understand this. Faster rotation means higher temperature. Nobody can afford to be so fundamentally wrong about something and to say otherwise.

      Long before running any climate model, one’s arithmetic and elementary physics must be correct.

      It is quite inconceivable that such a big error can be tolerated. Yet, this error lies at the bottom of the “Cathedral’s teaching”.

      It is very much like the “48 human chromosomes” blunder from decades ago. It is as if nobody was able to count back then?

      Today some ARE able to see the relation between the spinning and the temperature, however the majority isn’t. Too painful?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s