Solar Force

National Geographic’s Naked Science – Solar Force

This documentary “Solar force”, in essence, is a film about how natural variations in the sun’s magnetic fields affects our climate.

Join The Conversation

13 Comments / User Reviews

Leave Your Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  1. Nat Geo is unbelievably sloppy with their descriptions. The satellites that give the 3-D image of the sun are not “deployed in tandem, one in front of the other”. They are deployed one ahead of the earth in its orbit, the other trailing behind. Wow!

  2. Godinn, You have all of science against you. But keep being ridiculous, by all means.

  3. @Struck Out

    One more fool for the show you are. So let me get this straight.
    The earth has been significantly higher than of is now before we had cars and factories.
    The average global temperature hasn’t even risen by a degree in the last 100 years.
    The largest contributors to gases in the atmosphere are volcanos and plants.
    You’re just plain wrong about your assertions.

    But I can reasonably say that you have been successfully programed and your willingness to run around screaming the sky is falling and wanting to sign up for a carbon tax and generally be a fucking idiot is laughable to me. But fear not, there is something that is well understood here. It is well understood that you don’t understand any of what you are attempting to lay as fact. The ipcc report is a lie and that is a fact. Now please go to your room and try not to trip over your own feet on the way there.

  4. @Luigi

    You belong in the idiot corral with Brevan. Venus is 900 degrees because its atmosphere is %90 co2 as opposed to the staggeringly high figure of %0.039 here on earth. Please get a fucking brain before you start talking about shit you know nothing about. Its sad to watch a parrot regurgitated what they are told to think on TV.

  5. @Brevan

    Lmao at your statement “does not appear biased ” and. “I don’t understand why people are giving this a low rating “. You’re killing me son. The first thing the narrator said was that man made global warming was an indisputable fact. That is what is known as bias. Figured I ought to clue you in since you seem to unaware what bias actually means. As for the rest, well ill just toss you in with the creationists so I only have one corral of idiots to laugh at.

  6. Turned it off when they lied about,”man made global warming.v is an indisputable fact “. Much like creationists, this starts off with a conclusion and attempts to try to make point to that. That is not how science is done. Not to mention we already know that it is in fact disputable. We also know that Mann was a hack and a liar and that Gore (who is so far in the closet he’s having adventures in Narnia) is a greedy liar as well. No scientist would tell you something that is not understood is indisputable, especially when it is actually being disputed.

  7. @Strike
    Geez, Strike. After watching the show twice, you still missed the statement about man-made climate change being a scientific fact. And then you dismiss the conclusions of research into anthropogenic climate change as not being ‘sound rational science’, calling it a cop-out. A cop-out of what? Putting on a brave face against the evidence to run a mis-information campaign lobbying for extractive industries interests?

    The work of climate change science is not to ‘blame’ a single thing as you put it, but piecing together the influence of a variety of factors to understand and predict the impact of changes within them. Twenty years of refining this science attributes significant average global warming on a geologically short time scale to human releases of greenhouse gases.

    And no, variations in the sun’s output over this timescale and volcanic eruptions etc do not account for significant enough changes by themselves. When GHG concentrations are factored in, the impact is accounted for, and reasonably predictable. This is well understood, and this documentary was consistent with that.

    The DOOM DOOM DOOM side you dismiss as make-believe is the disruption to our agricultural and other production systems over a time scale of tens of years from now. But you can just build hundreds of desalination plant like the one at Wonthaggi to supply all the water Australia needs to its crops, and burn more coal to power it, eh mate?

    Your argument to do nothing about human induced climate change due to a lack of evidence, and other such dribble, is sadly indicative of the level of discourse on Australia on this incredibly important topic. It says a lot about how dysfunctional and greedy our resource-rich Australian society is.

  8. I fear I may have interpreted this show wrong so I have re-watched it, and I still get the same impression from it; that there are so many things we do not yet know about climate change that to blame it on a single thing is wrong. To say humans and our gas guzzling cars, oil refineries and gigantic cattle farms (to feed the already obese American market) are the reason we are all DOOMED DOOMED DOOMED is a cop-out to the highest degree and overlooking sound rational science.

    I’m well aware rational minds must make sense of everything, but sometimes we just simply don’t know all the facts and without all the facts you cannot make an informed decision. It’s good this program shows some of the research that is being funded and even if you believe it is a waste of tax payers money you have to find out what it isn’t before you know what it is.

    I’m an Australian and hence care very little for the American Republican/Liberal debate, even here it’s tantamount to choosing if you would rather be shot or stabbed, only they force everyone in the country to choose less you wind up in jail or receive a fine.

    My religious views are my own but I would be Agnostic, I simply don’t know therefore I refuse to choose. They had a funny South Park episode about being Agnostic. Although doesn’t stop me from trying to make secret deals with God when I’m throwing up at 4 in the morning after a lunch-dinner drinking session. Or at 5, Satan to grant me the sweet embrace of death in exchange for stopping the constant agonizing pain.

  9. Strike -“I’m surprised climate change advocates haven’t tried to rip this to shreds yet, what’s the problem boys?”

    Irregardless of the affect the solar activity may have to climate change you can not diminish the affect the increasing of carbon dioxide has in the atmosphere.

    Venus’s 800 degrees atmosphere is a shinning example of the affect of green house gases. Venus being closer to the sun has only a smaller affect and the 800 degrees can only be explained by the green house gas of carbon dioxide.

    Are you a Republican? What about creationism?

  10. Can’t they just once, produce a documentary without the over-hyped, sensationalist narrative? I just want to enjoy the facts, in a format that doesn’t make my ears bleed. I feel like I just watched a trailer for the next super hero movie..

  11. 9/10

    – Covers some pretty elementary information about the Sun, but does move on to intermediate level information.
    – Good pace of ideas and arguments. Did not appear biased.
    – I personally could not determine why several people gave this documentary a low rating, but perhaps they thought it ended prematurely since it is spit across five segments.
    – Does not discuss future experiments or theories. This show’s focus appears to be simply levelling the amount of understanding of solar phenomena shared among people.
    – I would have liked seeing the topics covered in more detail, such as why one fellow’s theories regarding the Sun’s impact on the coriolis effect was unpopular.

    Regarding the comment about climate change advocates:
    The documentary explicately claims twice that the climate is changing due to man-made causes, so there is little reason for the advocates to rip it to shreds. The documentary also claims that the Sun affects the weather as well, and gives reasonable support for that claim.

  12. I’m surprised climate change advocates haven’t tried to rip this to shreds yet, what’s the problem boys?