- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
I wrote:
The other article you attributed to "Willson" - "Willson (update – 2007)"
Is from a different, guy, whose name is actually "Wilson".
That page link links to another page:
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/sun_output_030320.html
which establishes the author is in fact the same "Willson" as the 2003 study. (The previous page spelled his name incorrectly as "Wilson".)
"And that link:
http://gpolya.newsvine.com/_news/2007/07/11/831692-total-solar-irradiance-tsi-variation-possible-contribution-to-climate-change
says no such thing with respect to a 50% contribtution either."
That part - which is to say, the important part - still stands, including with respect to the more detailed space.com link from that page.
Which is to say:
Nowhere in these links does Willson state - or even suggest under an extreme scenario - that, per manacker's assertion, solar radiation does or could account for a 50% contribution to global warming.
You are either illiterate or a liar, manacker. Or both.
