Climate-Change Skeptics Proved Wrong (Again): Sun Nixed As Cause

Yet another climate-denying claim has been scientifically shown the door, although this is expected to have as much effect as a trigonometric proof on a charging bull. Skeptics have been saying that global temperature rises might be due to changes in the sun, pretty much the ultimate "it wasn't us, a big boy did it," with a giant fusion reactor as the elusive culprit. Researchers have shown that this isn't the case and unlike the original claim their work involves advanced computer models, a distinct lack of the word "might", and has been published in Science.

Professors Peter Adams and Jeff Pierce did a bunch of things that those throwing around the solar excuse didn't:
a) They did detailed work analyzing the actual effects of such activity
b) They actually understood what such effects would really even be
c) They rigorously applied scientific procedures to this research, constructed computer models, and would have reported the results either away
d) They spent many, many years earning PhDs in scientific research and the title of "Professor."
We have to say, d) is our favorite.

The whole point of the original claim isn't any actual merit, just the fact that there were no models on the effects of changing solar activity on the atmosphere - so people who seriously stand up in public and say "Six billion monkeys setting fire to things has absolutely no effect on the air" could wave their arms and say "SOLAR blahblah COSMIC RAYS blablah (don't limit our emissions) blah!". Luckily, scientists have a way of taking that sort of thing and instead of shouting back - which the skeptics are professionals at - actually testing the hypotheses. Like it was some kind of "science" process designed to boil out biases and arrive at the truth or something.

The simulations show that the effects of cosmic rays from the sun are barely 1% of what they'd have to be to explain what we've seen. The scientists are even one step ahead of the slimy "maybe-sorta" game, admitting their simulations can't account for everything that exists, becuase nothing could ever do that (including their opponents' arguments), but pointing out that nothing omitted missed could skew the results enough to appreciably alter the results.

So the scientists have proven something to be bullshit, but since we live in a world where phone psychics still exist we'll have to wait and see whether that actually affects anything.