When did anyone dismiss solar activity on average temperatures?
Uhh.. when they came up with the stupid hockey stick graph that also ignores ice core samples past 200 years ago.
Any climatologist will tell you that warming is multifactorial. The heat originates from two sources: Solar and core radioactive breakdown. Greenhouse gas levels determine how much heat is retained from those two sources. So, higher GG levels lead to amplification of both source effects. That doesn't mean that average temperatures won't drop if either energy source diminishes in output, but it does mean that the average will be higher than it would have been otherwise. Ref: Chem 1101 and 1102, GEOS 3125.
Ah screw global warming. Our commenting on this just pushed this 2 day old link to the front page.
WTF.
raz-00
Well, since they haven't measured increased dune height yet, I can't see how that supports CO2 levels. I also don't think anyone argues that measured CO2 levels are being doctored, just over what their impact is relative to a bunch of other environmental factors.
As a counter to your headline, I could just as easily say imaginary solar activity peaks create warmer lunchtimes. Since the global warming crowd likes to dismiss the influence of solar cycles on mean surface temperature despite the ability of the sun to impart a 30 degree or more swing in temperature on any given day.