Skip to comments.Arguments that Prove that Climate Change is driven by Solar Activity and not by CO2 Emission
Posted on 05/26/2008 4:09:08 PM PDT by Delacon
Conveyor of a super-Einsteinian theory of gravitation that explains, among many other post-Einstein-effects, the Sun-Earth-Connection and the true cause of the global climate changes.
As the glaciological and tree ring evidence shows, climate change is a natural phenomenon that has occurred many times in the past, both with the magnitude as well as with the time rate of temperature change that have occurred in the recent decades. The following facts prove that the recent global warming is not man-made but is a natural phenomenon.
1. In the temperature trace of the past 10 000 years based on glaciological evidence, the recent decades have not displayed any anomalous behaviour. In two-thirds of these 10 000 years, the mean temperature was even higher than today. Shortly before the last ice age the temperature in Greenland even increased by 15 degrees C in only 20 years. All of this without any man-made CO2 emission!
2. There is no direct connection between CO2 emission and climate warming. This is shown by the fact that these two physical quantities have displayed an entirely different temporal behaviour in the past 150 years. Whereas the mean global temperature varied in a quasi-periodic manner, with a mean period of 70 years, the CO2 concentration has been increasing exponentially since the 1950s. The sea level has been rising and the glaciers have been shortening practically linearly from 1850 onwards. Neither time trace showed any reaction to the sudden increase of hydrocarbon burning from the 1950s onwards.
3. The hypothesis that the global warming of the past decades is man-made is based on the results of calculations with climate models in which the main influence on climate is not included. The most important climate driver (besides solar luminosity)...
Note from Mod: The source has pulled the article from their web site. Could be a hoax
(Excerpt) Read more at canadafreepress.com ...
New!!: Dr. John Ray's
Ping me if you find one I've missed.
Might be a problem with this.
Anyone contributing anything on “a super-Einsteinian theory of gravitation” must speak to me as if to a small child whose mother drank and smoked during pregnancy.
Human activity not only doesn’t significantly effect climate change, human activity CAN’T effect climate change.
This is what frightens the left most. They don’t believe in God so they have no faith in His mercy. This means that if humans can’t effect the climate then it is completely out of control and bounded by nothing. Therefore they experience much greater anxiety than normal people do about the subject.
Environmentalism isn’t a science, it has no respect for the scientific method and views science as just another political implement to be used to generate propaganda. I don’t think it’s a religion either. It’s more of a petty superstition - maybe the wood sprites will stop global warming if we just stop cutting down trees.
Sorry, I hadn't read the whole article when I posted #9. "Dr. Gerhard Löbert" is obviously a nutter, ranting against Jewish Physics.
FYI-—I am a AGW skeptic to the core. I believe most of the recent warming is due to the Sun and not human produced CO2. But I think this article has been debunked elsewhere on the WEB . Please don;t let AGW propaganda and misinforamation fool you by trying to get you to go crazy over jibberish.
WTF does gravity have to do with (solar) global warming?
But look at all the great things you can say from this article, such as ‘vacuum density waves’ or ‘VLBI baseline lengths’. No math required.
First I’ve heard of it as well, but the way it is described makes perfect sense to me. WAY more sense that we humans are changing our climate, esentially, overnight.
According to this article, it’s sunspots (or lack thereof) that is the culprit.
There’s a “Little Ice Age” coming very soon.
“FYI-I am a AGW skeptic to the core. I believe most of the recent warming is due to the Sun and not human produced CO2. But I think this article has been debunked elsewhere on the WEB . Please don;t let AGW propaganda and misinforamation fool you by trying to get you to go crazy over jibberish.”
I leaped before I looked. I’ve now looked. Its actually hard to find any debunking of Herr Loebert but thats because he has only been posting for about the last 3 months. He is all over the climate change blogs posting the same stuff that is listed in the article I posted. He is a busy bee and I am now pretty certain a loon. My apologies to everyone. My only excuse its that I fell for the fact that his “findings” have been sited on several well known blogs and that I’ve am a bit loggy from the holiday weekend.
Ya think? : ) I particularly liked this quote:
"Despite its great successes, the gravitational theory of the great physicist Albert Einstein, General Relativity, (which is of a purely geometric nature and is totally incompatible with the highly successful quantum theory) must be discarded because this theory is completely irreconcilable with the extremely large energy density of the vacuum that has been accurately measured in the Casimir experiment."
It isn't good to be associated with nutcases.
He sounds rational until you get beyond his bullet points. Then it looks a lot like his real agenda is can be summed up as “Heisenberg good, Einstein bad” and all that entails.
I smell a hoax - can we get any FReeper scientists & engineers to look at this? As I said I’m not scientist but this article reads like b.s. to me. A lot of the phrases and terms don’t ring true. I’ve been around enough physicists and engineers in my life (two physicist roommates, engineer father and brother, etc.) to have my b.s. detectors on high alert from what this guy is saying.
WTH is “Seaon Theory”?? How can a new theory of gravitation be based entirely in Quantum Mechanics?
Just google “Seaon Theory” in quotes (so that you don’t get a lot of extraneous items) and you get only a tiny number of hits, most of which pertain to this guy alone. I suspect this is a hoax to try to draw in and discredit people who are AGW skeptics. Just looking through the Google results, there is no indication of ANY significant science done around “Seaon Theory” — it’s most likely a crock of b.s.
It sounds like total b.s. to me. I’m definitely not a physicist but I’ve spent years of my life around some excellent ones and this just does not ring true - it sounds like someone trying to make up impressive sounding terms for their own agenda.
I linked to this article in a few of my Global Warming pings. I’m beginning to think that I owe the ping list an apology for doing so.
WTF is a “vacuum density wave.” As far as I know, vacuums contain no matter (or energy or whatever there is a vacuum of) in the first place, so the concept of a “vacuum density” becomes meaningless by definition. I think I would have to use doublethink in order to accept such a thing.
The headline sure sounded good : ) I have noticed that ‘proof’ is hard to come by in science.
Repeal the 17th. Overturn Reynolds v Sims. Make sure the electorate consists entirely of homeowners, business owners, and military members and vets, all of whom are at least 21 years old. Democracy is overrated.
Just curious, I haven’t heard anything about depleted ozone for a long time. That was the last greatest threat to mankind to raise it’s ugly head. What happened? Has the measurable ozone increased enough that ozone depletion has been quietly abandoned? Not trying to hijack the thread, the wife and I were wondering about that today.
Here’s one of the only places “Dr. Löbert” has ever surfaced before on the (English-speaking) web — this all sounds like such a cartload of donkey manure..... ROFL.
btw, if the “Needle of Honor of German Aeronautics” even exists I will take back (most of) the nasty things I have said about Al Gore. I can’t find any evidence of such a “Needle of Honor” in English, although I have not bothered to search for any possible German equivalents.
“I am humbled and most grateful for the opportunity to present you with an “exclusive” four part interview with one of the most leading research scientists in “skunk works” technology. This is one of those occasions, when for whatever reason, I was chosen to be the presenter of what is about to be revealed publicly for the first time ever. Quite honestly, it is a bit frightening. It is events like what you are about to read which puts me on every SyOPs (security operating procedures) radar screen in the world.”
“But I can’t help myself.literally. I am sitting here typing as if I am not attached to my fingers. It is either Divine Intervention, or remote mind control. How’s that for woo-woo. But seriously folks, this a bit unsettling, but somehow I know it is my journey to continue.”
“Why Dr. Löbert chose me for this project is still not clear.”
“He tells me it because of my stand-alone research with the Sun. I vacillate between this being the greatest honor I have ever experienced in my entire life as a result of my in-depth research for “Solar Rain”, to thinking I may be the biggest ego driven fool since Bubba Bush. Whichever way this goes, I am compelled to see it through. If you could see me right now, you would see me shaking my head from side to side thinking “why would a person of Dr. Löbert’s caliber choose me to disclose what could be acknowledged as the “next generation of gravitational, quantum, and magnetic physics”.”
I agree with your assessment. It is probably a hoax.
A valid new theory that supplants Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity would be front page news in every major newspaper in the world. It’s not out there on the web, so it’s probably a hoax meant to snare the gullible.
Agreed, and if you see the link in #29 it will be even more obvious that this is simply meant to discredit anyone who picks up on it, or else it is pure nutcase stuff.... but it smells to me like an intentional hoax meant to be a kind of “Trojan Horse” for any anti-AGW websites that pick up on it, such as Canada Free Press that published this article. Someone should warn Canada Free Press before they keep it around much longer....
“Someone should warn Canada Free Press before they keep it around much longer”
I have done so.
extend my apologies as well.
Didn’t even mention the moon, for one...
Looks like CFP has nuked the article, so either they agree it’s bogus or they are checking it out further.......
Pause while Delacon bangs his head on the keyboard for causing this fiasco.
lkjasl;dkfupounllehthtluwepoijnroiuyvhbl sdlkjsdofiusdlfjf,jlkgjlkjg sl;jgluu7dlfkjrh
Don’t beat yourself up - it is CFP that should provide an explanation to the public of how they received the article, what basis if any they had for taking it seriously, etc. I doubt that the “author” exists except as a fake pseudonym, so how did CFP come to believe that the article should be published on their website? Did anyone with any scientific background in physics review it before publication? That’s what interests me now - did someone unknown to them merely email the piece to them? Do they have any editorial and verification process at all? If it is a hoax then they need to seriously review the procedure by which such an (apparently) unscientific article was published to the world as though it could be taken seriously.
Human activity not only doesnt significantly effect climate change, human activity CANT effect climate change.Humans can *and do* effect the climate. The Ozone hole is a good example of a relatively uncontroversial and measurable example of human's changing the composition of the earth(via CFCs). The climate and atmosphere of the earth have changed significantly over the history of the earth too. Why do you think the atmosphere is full of oxygen? It didn't start that way.
This is what frightens the left most. They dont believe in God so they have no faith in His mercy. This means that if humans cant effect the climate then it is completely out of control and bounded by nothing. Therefore they experience much greater anxiety than normal people do about the subject.
Environmentalism isnt a science, it has no respect for the scientific method and views science as just another political implement to be used to generate propaganda. I dont think its a religion either. Its more of a petty superstition - maybe the wood sprites will stop global warming if we just stop cutting down trees.
Very likely. Disinformation campaign.
|· join · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post new topic ·|
And I'm the Devil With the Blue Dress On!
We’re supposed to take your word for it? ;’) Not the part about the devil... ;’) ;’) ;’)
>>Humans can *and do* effect the climate. The Ozone hole is a good example of a relatively uncontroversial and measurable example of human’s changing the composition of the earth (via CFCs). The climate and atmosphere of the earth have changed significantly over the history of the earth too.>>
This is a convoluted non sequitur. UV causes CFCs to dissociate, creating free chlorine ions which cause ozone to dissociate, in the laboratory. And CFCs, which are all manmade, are found in the atmosphere. Also the climate and the atmosphere have indeed changed in major ways. That much is rather well-accepted science today.
How CFCs get carried over the Antarctic where the Ozone hole appears, or how they are carried into the mid-latitude stratosphere where the layer is thickest, how much get exposed to UV and dissociate, how much that causes O3 to break down, and how much that affects the O3 layer are all by models, of course. But some of these models are quite coarse, and all are no more than hypotheses. What is lacking is a climate model that actually works.
O3 layer thinning has been measured by satellite, but reported to the public after being subjected to a series of regressions on natural phenomena (e.g., solar activity, seasonal cycles), plus regression on a boot strap prediction from the coarse models of how much free chlorine is present. The result is to show that the layer has thinned around 4% per decade and, not surprisingly, resembles (i.e., is subjectively correlated with) CFC emissions. The data and statistical reduction need an objective scrubbing.
Then the models need to be improved to the extent that they fail to reproduce the closed loop effect of the creation of O3 by UV. As the O3 layer thins, more UV gets through it to create more O3. Is there any evidence that anyone has developed such a model? Is it discussed anywhere? Assuming that it has not been developed, isn’t the model for O3 depletion open loop?
The bottom line for O3 layer depletion is the fear that excess UV reaches the little children. Unsubstantiated claims notwithstanding, this effect has not been measured. Instead of showing measurements confirm their depletion model, investigators rely on UV exposure estimates calculated from the unvalidated depletion model.
Humans probably do affect (not effect) the climate, but the amount is far too small to be measured. And ozone depletion is linked to neither global surface temperature nor global precipitation, the principal climate macroparameters. Not even the IPCC, the rabid promoter of AGW, reaches that claim.