It’s The Sun Wot Dun It!


All of us in politics remember the famous headline It’s The Sun Wot Won It”, from April 11th 1992, when the Conservatives squeaked a narrow and unexpected victory from the jaws of defeat.  But change just two letters, and you have an interesting comment on the current climate debate: “It’s the Sun Wot Dun It”.

On Friday, the day of the solar eclipse, there were widespread reports that the temperature dropped as the Sun was temporarily occluded, and it struck me that this was a telling confirmation of the obvious — that the primary driver of global temperature and climate is the Sun.  You might think that this observation, which I Tweeted, was so blindingly obvious that no confirmation was necessary.  But there are those who believe that the earth’s complex and chaotic climate system can be reduced to a single factor — and that that single factor is an odourless, harmless, non-toxic, invisible trace gas amounting to 0.04% of the atmosphere.  (Although CO2 is of course important — CO2 is vital for live on earth — and the current level is very low in geo-historical terms.  Indeed if it were halved overnight — as I’m sure Al Gore would love to do — plants would struggle to grow, and we’d struggle to eat).

Nonetheless I thought my Tweet was timely, topical and relevant, and an opportunity to draw attention to one of those self-evident facts that is, nonetheless, occasionally lost sight of.

I was therefore fairly astonished when my usual retinue of Twitter trolls went into overdrive to draw attention to my “scientific illiteracy”.  Better yet, the Huffington Post ran a headline “Helmer says eclipse proves that the Sun is heating the earth”?  This after I had received an e-mail from HuffPost Journo Jessica Eglot asking me to “explain my Tweet”.

Jessica, please get your facts right.  I did not claim that the eclipse “proved” anything.  I merely pointed out that the rapid cooling the moment the Sun was obscured clearly illustrated the importance of solar radiation in maintaining the Earth’s climate.  And that, surely, is beyond dispute.  Of course if the Sun were not heating the earth, then the terrestrial temperature would be close to absolute zero, and we’d all be dead.

But perhaps the trolls who accuse me of “scientific illiteracy” should do a bit of science themselves, rather than taking their environmental theories straight from that noted scientist Al Gore (or Railway Engineer Ravendra Pachauri).  They could start by reading Professor Fritz Vahrenholt’s book “The Neglected Sun” .  Vahrenholt by the way started out as a green socialist politician, became an Environment Minister, and ended up as CEO of RWE’s major renewables business “Innogy”.

The fact is that there is a rather good correlation between solar activity and climate — and a rather poor one between CO2 levels and climate.  Particularly striking is the fact that the two particularly cold periods of the Little Ice Age , the Maunder  and Dalton Minima, occurred when the Sun was exceptionally inactive (in sunspot terms).  And as Vahrenholt remarks, the Sun appears to be entering a new quiet phase, which could presage a new cooling period.

More generally, there has been a 1000-year cyclical pattern of mean global temperature for at least ten thousand years, and arguably longer.  The slight warming we have seen in the last 150 years is entirely consistent with that pattern — we need no anthropogenic explanation.  For those who believe that industrial CO2 emissions are driving temperature, they have a problem explaining what drove earlier warm periods long before the Industrial Revolution.

Of course leaving aside the eclipse, solar irradiance is actually rather consistent, which is why the IPPC feels justified in ignoring it.  But work by Svensmark and others has shown that the solar magnetic field (closely linked to sun-spot activity) is highly variable, and appears to affect the cosmic ray flux reaching the Earth.  This in turn affects cloud formation, albedo and climate.

If we leave aside the effects of nuclear decay in the Earth’s core, the Sun is the source of practically all energy on earth.  Even fossil fuels are “fossilised sunlight”, while bio-fuels are last season’s sunlight.  If you choose to believe that a trace gas (actually less significant than water vapour in terms of its greenhouse effect) is more important in determining the Earth’s climate than our friendly neighbourhood Star, you’re free to do so.  But it’s an odd idea.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

30 Responses to It’s The Sun Wot Dun It!

  1. omanuel says:

    Yes, “telling confirmation of the obvious.” Here’s the rest of the story:

    The world is ruled by the pulsar-centered Sun – a microcosm of our beautiful, bountiful, benevolent universe – composed entirely of two forms of one fundamental particle (dominant species in the solar core and solar photosphere):

    _ 1. Neutrons: Compact proton/electron pairs
    _ 2. H-atoms: Expanded proton/electron pairs

    Click to access Solar_Energy.pdf

    The universe, its galaxies and stars are dynamic (alive) because

    _ a.) As these expand, neutrons become H-atoms, and mass => energy
    _ b.) As these contract, H-atoms become neutrons; energy => mass

    [Here is a ‘Teachers Supplement to “Solar energy”]

    Click to access Supplement.pdf

    Thus operates the beautiful, bountiful, benevolent and infinite universe that frightened world leaders agreed to hide from the public in 1945, and assume for themselves the role of God, using National Academies of Science, the United Nations, the news media and prestigious research journals to promote the same false, lock-step, research-grant-directed consensus “science” worldwide.

    The Royal Society published Fred Hoyle’s misleading information on the internal composition of stars in 1946, and another British author of science fiction – George Orwell – started writing “Nineteen Eighty-Four” in 1946 to warn society that a new form of tyrannical government would use misinformation to rule the public. Seven decades later, . . .

    Thanks to the 2009 Climategate emails and blind arrogance in the responses of world leaders, the UN’s IPCC, NAS, publishers and the news media the post-WWII structure of false science and tyrannical rule of the world are collapsing.

    Permission was granted to any and all mainstream research journals to reproduce and publish the manuscript and/or supplement on “Solar energy” and to invite open, public review by editors, NAS, RS members, and other members of the 97% consensus science community.

    The purpose of the invitation for open review of the manuscript is SELF-identification of dishonest politicians, members of the National Academy of Science, and consensus “scientists” who converted science into a tool of government propaganda – scoundrels now seeking to hide responsibility for Climategate disclosures.

    With kind regards,
    Oliver K. Manuel
    March 21, 2015

  2. Sally Culling says:

    Hasn’t pachuri “removed himself” from his post after allegations of sexual harassment?!

    Sent from my iPhone


  3. The climate models on which the whole IPCC UNFCCC global warming scare founded are built without regard to the natural 60 and more importantly 1000 year periodicities so obvious in the temperature record. This approach is simply a scientific disaster and lacks even average commonsense .It is exactly like taking the temperature trend from say Feb – July and projecting it ahead linearly for 20 years or so. The models are back-tuned for less than 100 years when the relevant time scale is millennial. This is scientific malfeasance on a grand scale.The temperature projections of the IPCC – Met office models and all the impact studies which derive from them have therefore no solid foundation in empirical science being derived from inherently useless and specifically structurally flawed models. They provide no basis for the discussion of future climate trends and represent an enormous waste of time and money. As a foundation for Governmental climate and energy policy their forecasts are already seen to be grossly in error and are therefore worse than useless. A new forecasting paradigm needs to be adopted.
    For forecasts of the timing and extent of the coming cooling based on the natural solar activity cycles – most importantly the millennial cycle – and using the neutron count and 10Be record as the most useful proxy for solar activity check my blogpost linked at
    The most important factor in climate forecasting is where earth is in regard to the quasi- millennial natural solar activity cycle which has a period in the 960 – 1020 year range.For evidence of this cycle see Figs 5-9. From Fig 9 it is obvious that the earth is just approaching ,just at or just past a peak in the millennial cycle. I suggest that more likely than not the general trends from 1000- 2000 seen in Fig 9 will likely repeat from 2000-3000 with the depths of the next LIA at about 2650. The best proxy for solar activity is the neutron monitor the count and 10 Be data. Based on the Oulu neutron count – Fig 14 it appears that the solar activity millennial maximum peaked in Cycle 22 in about 1991. There is a varying lag between the change in the in solar activity and the change in the different temperature metrics. There is a 12 year delay between the neutron peak and the probable millennial cyclic temperature peak seen in the RSS data in 2003.
    There has been a declining temperature trend since then (Usually interpreted as a “pause”) There is likely to be a steepening of the cooling trend in 2017- 2018 corresponding to the very important Ap index break below all recent base values in 2005-6. Fig 13. The Polar excursions of the last few winters in North America are harbingers of even more extreme winters to come more frequently in the near future.

  4. AndyG55 says:

    Well said. 🙂

  5. John says:

    Spot on Roger. It seems a lot of these “warmists” are either knowingly ignorant or just stupid. I suspect a bit of both.

    • omanuel says:


      The lock-step global warming dogma opened the eyes of many of us who blindly believed that the UN’s IPCC, the UK RS, the US NAS, etc. were trying to protect, rather than to enslave, the public.

  6. Alan Wheatley says:

    I think this quote from is relevant and of interest.
    “Carbon dioxide levels on Earth have in the past been much higher. Plants evolved the capacity to use higher levels of carbon dioxide, but under modern conditions, the rate of their photosynthesis is limited. Waste carbon dioxide can be directed into greenhouses growing tomatoes. This extra carbon dioxide enables the tomatoes to photosynthesise faster, which increases sugar production, improving flavour and yield.”

    You can also read about growing tomatoes under enhanced CO2 conditions on the British Sugar Web Site.

    • Roger Helmer MEP says:

      You’re absolutely right, Alan. There is clear evidence that the slightly increased levels we now see of atmospheric CO2 are leading to more rapid plant growth, bio-mass formation and higher crop yields — exactly what we need to feed a hungry planet. Al Gore won’t like it, but higher levels of CO2 are literally greening the Earth.

      • Steve Brown says:

        They aren’t “slightly increased” though. Would you like to tell us the percentage increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration on pre-industrial levels?

  7. Ex-expat Colin says:

    Anything that pops up as Professor or Doctor (this and that) I largely ignore by default. Pity really because there (as always) are good folk out there. Yep, a quick nip down to Absolute Zero would be very much life changing.

    All I need for my Toms in the greenhouse is CO2 I know and apart from Sun, Compost/Manure, Water. Plus time to tend and that balance of chemicals. Trouble is C02 will fast escape which is another greenhouse effect I suppose?

    Are those people that pump their tyres up with Nitrogen a bother? Over 70% of it in our atmosphere. Question is does it cause climate issues being in such a large volume. Just think, someone might need model financing? No, only kidding….. I think.

    • Roger Helmer MEP says:

      Colin — Maybe I’m cheating a bit to call Vahrenholt a Professor, because it was an honorary Professorship. The trolls will be out there chanting “he’s not a scientist”. No, he’s not. He’s a successful green politician and businessman. But his book is written for the informed layman, and it’s packed full of references to peer-reviewed science.

  8. Anne says:

    The “God” Factor.
    They prayed for rain in the year of drought,
    Yet when it rained, wondered what it was about,
    For floods and chaos are the out come of man
    For not preparing for what was to come.
    Farmers are paid to let fields lie fallow,
    And foreigners to dictate what THEY allow,
    No cattle or sheep graze in fields of green,
    No corn or wheat swaying in the breeze.

    Growing bio-fuel is now the golden rule,
    “Wind-Farms” on hilltops seems kind of ‘cool’.
    Solar Panels installed upon our rooftops,
    Importing our food, the stupidity never stops.
    But the saddest and greatest betrayal of all,
    Is not being prepared for man’s great fall,
    For so little faith in the granting of prayer,
    Yet what is the point if they think no one is there?

    Is this shallowness prevalent in our Nation?
    Has ‘common sense’ been forever forsaken?
    Remember the floods of Noah and the Ark?
    Look up at the heavens when the clouds are dark.
    Yet for Greece the earth is scorched in the sun,
    People are dying ‘ere each day is done,
    For nature relentlessly plays out its wild ways,
    Yet foolish man, the heavy price pays.

    No matter how leaders plan for greed’s sake,
    Forgetting the “God Factor” is the gravest mistake.
    For generations farmers in our country have known
    When to plant, when to sow the seeds that have grown.
    That stretch of water that naturally separates,
    So that no one, friend or foe, can penetrate,
    Each separate nation and language should tell why,
    Our Country must be free, to once more fight, or die?

  9. omanuel says:

    Privately, Roger, . . .

    Implications for a Global Ministry of Truth would be horrific for mankind.

    Evidence for a Global Ministry of Truth are overwhelming in these false but world-wide Standard Models of:

    1. Earth’s Climate
    2. Atomic Nuclei
    3. Ordinary Stars
    4. Big Bang Cosmology

    • Roger Helmer MEP says:

      You remind me of a story in today’s paper where an Islamist preacher asserts that we should observe God’s laws, not man’s laws. Of course he is missing the point: he doesn’t really mean “God’s laws”. He means “My personal interpretation of God’s laws”. Every religion has a different take on God’s laws. They can’t all be right. One thing I’m sure of though: there’s nothing in God’s laws calling for beheadings and suicide bombs.

      • omanuel says:

        I agree. The beautiful, bountiful, benevolent universe (reality or truth) revealed by measurements and observations may be called different names in different religions.

        Another name is used for the one who promotes beheadings and suicide bombs.

    • omanuel says:

      The UN’s IPCC seems to be the “Global Ministry of Truth” for Earth’s Climate.

      The UN’s IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) may be the “Global Ministry of Truth” for Nuclear and Theoretical Physics. See this organizational chart of the IAEA*

      Click to access orgchart_0.pdf

      *“This includes the Abdus Salam International Centre for Theoretical Physics (ICTP), legally referred to as the “International Centre for Theoretical Physics”, is operated as a joint programme by UNESCO and the Agency. Administration is carried out by UNESCO on behalf of both organizations.”

  10. Anne says:

    Come the 2015 General Election.

    What is the point in voting,
    For those three Political Parties of ours?
    To sit on those ever green benches
    When they have given away all their powers?
    David Cameron eagerly obeyed his masters
    In that would be government of the EU,
    He divided the Country of ENGLAND
    Into Regions with Elected Mayors too.

    Our Governments over those many years,
    Treacherous Treaties they have signed,
    Never once have they allowed any one of us
    To voice what was in thought and mind.
    Yet why are both Houses of Parliament,
    Still full to the ceilings in both?
    Sitting on those once great proud benches
    If their Crown and their country they loath?

    For they want to be governed by “Europe”
    And to be so for now and forever more
    We have lost the Governing of our Country,
    Yet no foreign Army set foot on our shore.
    Just how could they take the Queen’s shilling?
    Make their solemn Oath to the wearer of the Crown?
    If they never intended to be faithful and true
    And want their own Countrymen brought down?

    It is time EU Treaties are repudiated
    And for us all to be free once more.
    To become the proud Island and nation
    When our ships went to sea in full force.
    For the people of this Country are so angry
    At what their two ‘leaders’ have done,
    To their fairy tails we all have listened,
    Of these new EU desires we’ll have NONE.

    There may never be an EU REFERENDUM
    For we have been promised them in the past,
    They want us to be dominated forever
    But their promises are not made to last.
    Come the 2015 General Election
    The people know what they have to do,
    Use it as the promised REFERENDUM
    Only Vote for those that want OUT of the EU.

    • Brian H says:

      The thinking’s ok, but the poetry is lame.

      • Anne says:

        It gets the “message” across and that is exactly what I wanted to happen. You see, for even YOU read it. When I have finished RESEARCHING what our Governments over the years have been up to, I always finish the articles with such as the above. You do not have to read them you know-and many do not bother, and I put such as the above, down to reading too many RUPERT books many, many years ago-Yup! Even before that last World War.

      • Brian H says:

        I could only plow thru a few lines, here and there. As usual, it gets worse as you proceed, as the ‘message’ gets more desperate to get through. Sorry.

  11. Richard111 says:

    I lived and worked for several years in desert regions. Mostly in South and South West Africa. There I took up star gazing because of the wonderful clear nights. After the 40+ temperature of the day the early evening cool was wonderful. But by dawn the temperature would be close to zero. A bit much as I usually wasn’t warmly dressed. I found that by scooping away a few inches of sand I had a nice WARM patch to lie down. Occasionally, while concentrating on the stars I would hear a sharp crack from a nearby pile of rocks. On investigating I found that quite large flakes of rock had split off the surface. I found the newly exposed rock surface would be warm compared to the rest of the rock.
    I never thought much about these experiences until I started to hear about AGW and how the world should really be at -18C. I read up on some science about heat capacity and heat flow through solids, liquids and the variable temperature lapse rate up through the atmosphere and realised the idea of man controlling the climate by fiddling the level of CO2 in the atmosphere was totally bonkers!
    I did the science and I am referred to as a denier! Anyone who believes in AGW is a denier of some two hundred years of science.

  12. Anne says:

    Carbon Footprints.

    If you worry about the environment
    Look up at the sun in the sky,
    Politicians would have you think of CO2’s
    Environmentally, I don’t know why.
    Perhaps we take for granted
    The sun that shines each day,
    Even though at times it hides
    Behind those clouds of grey.

    But what if the sun burnt itself out?
    What would warm us up then?
    What if it exploded? Blew itself up?
    Turned the day into night again?
    Just suppose it fell right down
    Out of sight of our earth one day?
    To warm up another planet
    What would politicians then say?

    As the earth started to freeze right over,
    In a permanent kind of way,
    No more ‘hundred year’ cycles
    We knew of, in ‘global warming’ days.
    What happened to environmental tax
    We paid to save our world?
    Where is the “global warming” now?
    As my story starts to unfold?

    There is no doubt we need to recycle
    In this easy come and go world we live,
    We take resources out of the ground
    But nothing in its place we give.
    But to be spied upon, bugs in bins?
    Be watched and tagged is no fun,
    Make a mistake, an on the spot fine?
    Its what a dictator would have done?

    I have read the CO2 calculator,
    Worked out what is expected of us,
    The importance of greenhouse gases
    Of dry-ice, and the need to fuss.
    But without our sun, moon and stars
    The earth will surely die,
    These tales of carbon emissions
    Surely it wasn’t all a lie?

  13. zipinkent says:

    BBC eclipse guru Pallab Ghosh witnessed the eclipse at Jodrell Bank and his report was recycled many times during the afternnon.

    I wonder why HuffPo didn’t pick up on his blunder, when he said “…it was like an evening light, the shadows got longer”.

    So during an eclipse, the shadows get longer, do they? And this is from a BBC science reporter!

  14. Brian H says:

    ” vital for live on earth”


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 )

Connecting to %s