In this chamber, 63 CERN scientists from 17 European and American institutes have done what global warming doomsayers said could never be done — demonstrate that cosmic rays promote the formation of molecules that in Earth’s atmosphere can grow and seed clouds, the cloudier and thus cooler it will be. Because the sun’s magnetic field controls how many cosmic rays reach Earth’s atmosphere (the stronger the sun’s magnetic field, the more it shields Earth from incoming cosmic rays from space), the sun determines the temperature on Earth.
The hypothesis that cosmic rays and the sun hold the key to the global warming debate has been Enemy No. 1 to the global warming establishment ever since it was first proposed by two scientists from the Danish Space Research Institute, at a 1996 scientific conference in the U.K. Within one day, the chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Bert Bolin, denounced the theory, saying, “I find the move from this pair scientifically extremely naive and irresponsible.”
Well, I’m getting sleepy. Last google found this results page:
http://news.google.com/news/story?q=nature+cern+cosmic&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ncl=dyEd86jTK9u92iMkba28BtUrvGS4M&hl=en&ei=9IxiTqnjJaLliAKFj_m4Cg&sa=X&oi=news_result&ct=more-results&resnum=2&ved=0CCkQqgIwAQ
What I notice is that the “business” websites are reporting the Cern Study as proof that AGW is not occuring ((the Oh No position)) but that the casual and scientific blogs are reporting that it is an open question.
what I don’t get is that lets say Cosmic Rays do produce cloud cover just as the PUKES want us to believe. ….. So What?….. The whole point about cloud cover is that it both reflects light and retains heat all as gets reflected in the RECORD OF ATMOSPHERIC TEMPERATURE AND CO2 LEVELS.
I’m not a scientist so I will just state my ignorance for anyone’s helpful comment: the net effect of Cosmic Rays has been fully accounted for in the models. Worst Case: Cosmic Rays are heating the planet up at 1000’s of times faster than what the model says. If true–seems to me that that evidence there are other factors that are NEUTRALIZING THE EFFECT OF cOSMIC RAYS that have also not been appreciated because the net/net/net effect is that we have very precise and accurate air temp and co2 level data back 100’s of thousands of years.
How is that possible if Cosmic Rays turn out to mean what they do? I don’t get it, and I still get it better than “this absolutely kills cap and trade.” The two issue aren’t related==scientifically that is.
I don’t care about Algore trying to get rich with cap and trade or carbon credits and as Oh No fears I also doubt such programs are anything but the Super Rich continuing to scam the rest of us. The point of AGW is to encourage the development of Green Energy so that carbon credits and what not are irrelevant because the Market has found a cheaper alternative.
Jesus—you dopes miss the boat. Do you dress in swim wear when you plan your excursions?
I think I have this straight — some scientists bombarded a carefully prepared chamber with particles that emulated cosmic rays and found that this increased the production of 1-nanometer-size aerosol particles by some factor. Even though others pointed out that it takes aerosol particles 10 to 100 times larger to affect cloud formation, Fox News trumpets “The science is settled — no AGW!!!!!”
Reminds me of when some lab measured a photon and caused a photon to appear elsewhere with the same quantum numbers, all the “news” outlets were proclaiming “We’ll all be beaming up to the Enterprise in a year!!!!!”
Also, I have to say this article is very poorly written — my high school English teacher would give it a failing grade.
The science is not settled. This adds a decimal point or two in one tiny part of the overall picture and the size of the change is not clear. All this reaction is grasping at straws by those desperate to continue operating under the status quo.
Remember kiddies, Buddha teaches us that desire leads to suffering!
Bobbo – Christ man, you run your mouth more than my 4 year old niece. Time to take your Ritalin.
Dan–its sad to see you taking time away from your parenting obligations, but assuming wifey is doing her share or you spiked the formula: YES, I have an AGW Jones to exercise.
I’ve gone back and forth on the issues for various reasons. Its one of the few topics on which I can carefully observe how I make my mind up, and how I change it.
As you note, in STARK contrast to those who are convinced of one position or another. Please don’t quote my joke postings. They are a private matter between me and my sense of humor.
Know what I mean?
#35. Hey I talk to myself too, sometimes I answer myself. I just don’t exercise my schizophrnic wrestling matches by posting to a blog.
Work it out yourself, than bring us your conclusions, but for God’s sake…get to the friggin’ point man.
Dan–I disagree. In the main, I did post my progress so that others could jump in as they wished and form their own conclusions.
what do you want me to do, follow nonames example? Work up my own well researched multi-linked conclusions and then lose it all to the spam filter?
further Dan, I’m not arguing with myself. I’m arguing with Liars, Shills, the dimwitted, and those who only want to post conclusions with no links and no analysis.
Know what I mean?
I’m glad to see some science that is willing to be critical of the thinking that is accepted as fact, but is unprovable.
I like the comparitive analysis of the temps on other planets, good data there.
That the Earth’s surface temperature is !not¡ tied to Sun output energy/matter seems like a doomed theory by someone who doesn’t live in a place where the seasons bring different temperatures.
However, I imagine most people here couldn’t explain why the Earth is colder in winter (N. Hemisphere), than the summer, without first looking it up on The Wiki.
Five bucks says this thing degenerates into a political dem vs rep argument. Ten says it breaks 100 posts half or better from bobbo.
I think where we got carried away was that while dumping carbon (i.e. coal soot) is a bad idea, and carbon-monoxide is toxic, the idea that CO2 (which we exhale and is absorbed by virtually all plant life and the ocean) is somehow going to destroy us all is just wrong. And now it’s proven wrong.
What was missed is this:
The preponderance of large electron-beam display tubes that have populated the civilized world since the late 1940’s is the real culprit.
Electron beams smash into the phosphors at near relativistic speeds, thus producing the first step in a series that have led to the phenomenon we ascribe to the production of climate change.
Now that electron beam display tubes are obsolete, your Republican Science Council for Freedom from Logic asks that you, in the national interest, refrain from taking any economy-altering measures until the world returns to the status quo all on its own by 2025, at which time current Republican officials will be retired on all that lobbyist money and will no longer give a damn.
It’s a witch hunt by religious zealots. Philosophy failed to separate science from theology.
The only conclusion you can make is that no matter what side of the debate a scientific study comes down on; there will be some people who vehemently reject it and those who vehemently adopt it…. and neither of which are able to understand the science.
If only Global Warming was caused by the suicidal self-immolation of politicians.
Instead of Buddhists we could get rid of all of these partisan scum who answer a question with “How many fingers do you want me to see?”
I’d put up with a few extra degrees of heat for that…
Those CRU email cuttings would damn all involved, but no. The leftist media crucified Nixon on this level of evidence, but they have moved into another mode to secure some unknown agenda.
Just listen to the presentations of dissenting scientists in forums that have to be outside sanctioned poisoned peer group gatherings. Oh they say therefore these are pseudo scientists outside of their expertise.
Listen to the testimonies of these guys.
1) they are unable to have phD students working with them as they will not have careers, hence it is not ethical to have them. These guys are doing the work as they are old and hence are not concerned with future work prospects.
2) they state that their results will never be through the peer groups. Just read the spurious damnation that the AGWers come up with on the denier denier web sites. No dissenter will ever get through.
For the half ass knee jerk jerk response I’ll recall the presentation of the two dissenters at a european conference, no doubt a outcast forum from the sanctioned AGWers. Retracing my surfing now.
The mass of the sun and mass of the earth is too big to ignore. We are but a pimple on the chicken’s ass and though we might irritate the chicken, we do not control it.
The weather on earth is bigger than all of us,
just as it is on all the other planets.
It’s time we get a life and learn to live with the weather we have.
Bobbo, you are turning more and more into Mr ConFusion. The link I posted was a discussion of how long CO2 stays in the atmosphere. You asked what about the CO2 we’ve been dumping for 150 years. Put some thought into it.
AS for cosmic rays, you are way off as to what the study says or what it means. Cosmic rays don’t heat the planet.
Someone once said “Follow the money.”
Who has the most money, governments, or *VERY* large and rich corporations?
Let me give you a clue, most western, democratic governments are broke and most oil companies are richer than ever.
If government and academics made it up, the well funded polluters could bury it in a relaxed afternoon. The only reason that the idea of AGW has not gone away is that it must have something in it that can only be disproved to those who want do do what the rich tell them to.
Got the two dissenter presentation links
1st Nir Sahviv’s on the Cern cloud stuff
http://youtube.com/watch?v=L1n2oq-XIxI
2nd and here my focus for you is Vincent Courtillot’s.
Please take time to listen to his testimony of AGW peer group damnation.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=IG_7zK8ODGA&feature=related
#48, Holdfast
Just because the governments are broke doesn’t mean they still aren’t spending like they ain’t.
Governments and private groups have spent well over a hundred (probably 200) BILLION dollars on global warming research, propaganda, handouts to companies and organizations (half a billion alone on that one now defunct solar panel maker that Obama backed), and whatnot.
I seriously doubt that the oil and coal companies have spent more than a combined 2 billion on their side. Besides, the oil and coal companies know it’s far more cost efficient and effective to BRIBE POLITICIANS AND REGULATORS than to go on a PR campaign that’s a near vertical uphill climb right now.
Studying “AGW” is ma major, major gravy train for scientists the likes of which haven’t been seen since the 1960’s Space Race. You better believe they have a personal, vested interest in continuing the hoax (if nothing else, it means they don’t have to spend as much time writing research grant proposals). Even if individual scientists don’t believe it, the funding conscious bureaucrats who run the various research departments and foundations sure as hell care for the funding.
Right now, AGW is so heavily promoted and protected by many academic schools that any professors who rock the boat are threatening their own academic careers if they don’t already have tenure.
So, if you’re going to follow the money on where the Truth in Science lays with the assumption that more money = more corruption, the scientists promoting AGW are far, far more suspect than any scientist employed by the coal and gas companies by a factor of at least a hundred.
Sadly, the AGW hoax is sucking away a lot of funding and attention from very real environmental problems and crisis.
Global Warming is irrelevant. Any solutino that requires Americans to drive 4x4s less or live in smaller houses is evil. Period.
However, in the name of placating idiots, I’ll give up my truck if Al Gore agrees to commit suicide since he thinks it’s so important. (And I have to see him do the deed before turning over the keys.)
On human heating of the earth. Look up how little CO2 gas is actually in the atmosphere and how much of it is human produced by burning fossil fuels.
The key theory isn’t that the trivial amount of CO2 we added to atmosphere which is well over 99% other gases to the point it gets in the way of photosynthesis is going to do much directly.
It was _supposed_ to put a lot of water vapor in the upper atmosphere and that was supposed to hold in a lot of heat which would add more water vapor which would hold in more heat, etc. NASA sent up a satellite and that isn’t happening. End of that discussion.
This says other mechanisms can have huge impacts which should have been obvious to all but the feeble minded and easily hustled.
The last point is a killer. Has anything the doomsayers predicted in the past come to pass the way they claimed it would? The answer is are you out of your blinking mind? Bleep NO!The last three winters in Europe haven’t matched their fairy tails at all and neither is what is going on in the southern Hemisphere. Come to that last winter in TN was not mild!Southern CA got heavy rains and it wasn’t supposed to!The west had historic snow falls! People were still skiing on the 4th of July! We aren’t having large numbers of mega hurricanes. Their success rate is about as bad as your typical psychic!
If you look at what they claim the past was like and use sources other than those recently reworked by the doomsayers does the data match? The answer is bleep NO! Not even when the source is old newspapers and magazine!
My question is when a bunch of climatologist can’t get the past right nor predict the future why are people still giving these clowns hundreds of millions of dollars? The answer I come up with is not flattering.
It’s so simple, they are right.
Global Warming is Caused by
…guess what!!
Uhhh, polar bear farts?
G
Oops. iPhone fart above…
I hope the cause of polluted water is also found to be from up yonder or down below. I’m tired that all the bad surface shit is caused by those of us on the surface.
#38–What==good enough to parse:
I’m glad to see some science that is willing to be critical of the thinking that is accepted as fact, but is unprovable. /// Many important scientific issues accepted as fact are unprovable. Like smoking cigarettes causes cancer. Like evolution occurred in the past. Like the earth is more than 6000 years old. “Proof” is like that.
I like the comparitive analysis of the temps on other planets, good data there. //// Good data supporting what unprovable conclusion or consensus? ONLY that their temp variations are not caused by Humans. How many more variables do you think there are?
That the Earth’s surface temperature is !not¡ tied to Sun output energy/matter seems like a doomed theory by someone who doesn’t live in a place where the seasons bring different temperatures. /// Define: tied? Sun’s output is BUT ONE VARIABLE. How about distance from the sun—and all the others. None of us here can even ballpark how many variables are actually accounted for in the models, or even how many models make up the consensus. WE DON’T EVEN KNOW WHAT WE ARE ARGUING ABOUT. I go with the consensus final report.
However, I imagine most people here couldn’t explain why the Earth is colder in winter (N. Hemisphere), than the summer, without first looking it up on The Wiki. //// Using your insight it must be because the Sun outputs more cosmic rays. Ha, ha. Yes, that is your position.
And that WHAT—makes you a dope.
Mike N–we are both being conclusionary in our very broad reading/summary of your link. I stopped reading when the link said the carbon loading was sufficient to drive AGW even though “eventually” the carbon would be recycled.
We are already past the tipping point of 350 ppm. the fact that carbon is going up to predicted levels approaching 1000 ppm makes any discussion about how/when the carbon will return to historic levels CENTURIES from now doesn’t help your “carbon is irrelevant” position.
You aren’t of the Super Dumbdumb school that plants use co2 and therefore its totally safe are you? You haven’t said that yet as others have.
To those DOPES–please explain why wine stops fermenting at 12-13%? Its the same issue, depending on how you define it.
Other gems of anti-science Dumbdumb no think:
1. Hoomans are too insignificant to cause climate change. //// Yea, just like we are too insignificant to cause the greatest species extinction event since the last big meteor. If you like, you can blame our cars/houses/industry. Its not “us” so much as what we do.
2. The co2 percentage is too small. //// Way to go Einsteins. You know ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ABOUT ATMOSPHERIC CHEMISTRY but it “feels” like a low number so you go ahead and vomit that ignorance? Ice core measurements ABSOLUTELY SHOW the resulting temperature from the co2 levels. ((Yes Mikey there is a feed back loop.)) Lots of chemistry takes very little amounts of some ingredient/element/process to completely shape the outcome.
When notions as pathetically ignorant as these are offered up as counter concerns, it drives anyone with a scientific orientation to scientific issues to be…..to be…..embarrassed to be of the same species.
Silly Hoomans.
Ya know, several hundred polar bear are shot every year. Check the record, sometime. But thousands exist, in spite of this hunting. And yet, they always manage to find one lone polar bear, taking it easy, perched on a half melted piece of the the ice flow. And this “proves” that global warming is real, and that mankind is the cause of it. Amazing how science pulls these conclusions out of its collective asses.
And yet, the theory that cosmic rays causes cloud seeding, is actually many decades old. And was demonstrated by the invention of the cloud chamber. A quite primitive bit of technology, by today’s standards. And it’s also well known that solar winds, the the sun generates, can deflect cosmic rays from arriving at earth, from some distant source. And if more cloud formation, keeps the earth cool, from the sun’s energy. Then ergo, the lesser the solar winds, the cooler earth’s climate will be. And vice versa. IOWs, mankind hasn’t squat to do with it. And can’t effect it, in any significant way. Unless mankind is willing to build its own cosmic ray sources, in orbiting satellites, to bombard earth atmosphere, whenever solar activity is strongest.
But of course, that will never happen. Because no one wants to get sued, for the damages caused by storms that can be attributed to human creation or interference. And you can bet lawyers would line up to do just that. So we will all just have to fry, because we can’t tolerate anything accept natural weather phenomena, occurring at random. Make a few extra clouds appear, and someone will blame them for all kinds of property damage, and loss of life.
It’s akin to the old chinese adage, “Save a man’s life, and you become responsible for it.” Only it’s “Save planet earth’s life, and they become responsible for it.” Now ya know why God doesn’t make his presence known, less ambiguously. And the only way we might alter the world’s climate, is to set up a network of CR satellites, that operate randomly, and without any human control. So no can point to any one, made by any nation, and say that one made a storm that wiped out my chicken farm.
Man’s activities have some influence on global warming, but they are not the only cause, and probably not the most important. In the past, before man’s activities had any influence on weather, earth had many periods of warming and cooling. There must be other causes, and very powerful, to the change. Man’s activities may make it worse, I agree with that.