Skip to comments.Has the AGW argument imploded?
Posted on 08/31/2011 9:46:04 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
Has new research disproven the theoretical models of anthropogenic global warming? A new study by a European nuclear research group appears to show that the actual prime cause of temperature shifts in the Earths climate isnt carbon dioxide at all, or even the broader range of greenhouse gases, but the large ball of fire in the center of the solar system. Not that this study from CERN has attracted much attention in the media, at least not in the US but at least Nature reported the results and the implications:
It sounds like a conspiracy theory: cosmic rays from deep space might be creating clouds in Earths atmosphere and changing the climate. Yet an experiment at CERN, Europes high-energy physics laboratory near Geneva, Switzerland, is finding tentative evidence for just that.
Er, it really doesnt sound like a conspiracy theory. The notion that the sun heats the planets is rather mundane, or at least it used to be before scientists started claiming that carbon dioxide would superheat the atmosphere. In fact, AGW skeptics have long pointed to solar cycles as a much more likely explanation for the gradual but uneven warming seen over the last century or so.
To find out, Kirkby and his team are bringing the atmosphere down to Earth in an experiment called Cosmics Leaving Outdoor Droplets (CLOUD). The team fills a custom-built chamber with ultrapure air and chemicals believed to seed clouds: water vapour, sulphur dioxide, ozone and ammonia. They then bombard the chamber with protons from the same accelerator that feeds the Large Hadron Collider, the worlds most powerful particle smasher. As the synthetic cosmic rays stream in, the group carefully samples the artificial atmosphere to see what effect the rays are having.
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...
The people who are trying to keep the AGW scam alive are the same kind of people who lost money to those Nigerian bank account scams and keep them alive on the net.
Algore’s head is about to explode.
It's cool to be warm.
Maybe he imploded also :^)
Would love to hear from some scientist on what exactly in layman's terms this means specifically.
Behold, actual science.
When he published his theory, the eurinal moonbats went after him with a vengence. They started claiming he was an instrument of the "oil industry" trying to discredit their pet theory. The basis for the charge was that he had once done research for the oil companies - back in 1968 or something!
He laughed at them, because he was old and really didn't give a crap what any of them said. He was a scientist with no political agenda, and was shocked that his theory was so controversial and his motives were being questioned.
I wish I could remember more about him or even the magazine where I read the article. It was a science magazine, like Discover or something.
They made a sealed box containing a replication of the earth’s atmosphere at the levels where clouds form. Then they hit this sample atmosphere with a replica of the sun’s output, then measured what happened. No carbon was involved.
They got measured warming in line with global warming. Ergo, the sun causes global warming, not carbon emissions.
Now that I read the article, it may be Jasper Kirkby who was the subject of the article I read back then.
Very interesting indeed. I have read abou the Collider and it can sure make one wonder how far they will get with that. It’s a huge thing!
Unfortunately my brother is the science minded one in our family and he understands it all completely. When we spoke about the Carbon” ordeal he flatly stated carbon is not the issue and the environmentalists would be further ahead just planting trees.....he’s pretty livid about the Carbon Tax issue etc. Says it’s all ridiculous. ..and he did mention the sun at that time and how it works on our plaet...but of course soon went over my ability to grasp.
I found a link to the article I read, but you have to subscribe to read the whole thing:
He's not in his eighties, he's in his fifties, but he doesn't really care if his theory is politically unacceptable. He just cares that it is correct.
This is all you need to know: When temperatures on Earth went up... so did the temperatures on Mars and Venus. Pretty sure there’s no carbon-spewing SUVs on those planets.
The Sun is a giant fusion furnace that heats planets at several-light-hours’ distance. When its output fluctuates, everything in the solar system is affected.
I also doubt any of these actual scientists have several mansions and fly in private jets all the time like Al Gore and his fellow AGW believing “scientists” do.
All these beautiful works of art were created by advancing and retreating glaciers. Or, in other words, Climate Change.
"SEVEN YEARS OF COLLEGE DOWN THE DRAIN!"
Even among the liberals, a dawning realization is hitting. They're starting to understand that AGW is a faith among them, not a science. They know it's true, but they can't prove it. Doesn't make them any less devout, but it makes them increasingly nervous to try and throw down with the 'science is settled' line like they used to. It's anything but.
The only thing that's for sure is their devotion to the church of Gaia. Which is fine, but they're learning that scaring people with crap research is a losing proselytization technique.
“Algores head is about to explode.”
This, too, is caused by cosmic rays. The Fantastic Four, however, were transformed by greenhouse gasses.
They have proven that gamma rays entering a replicated Earth atmosphere can provide the energy required to create the nucleus for water condensation to occur. Basically turning water vapor (gas) into liquid water (clouds). So gamma rays must affect the density of clouds in the Earth atmosphere. So when the Earth receives more gamma rays, we have more clouds created. More clouds cool the Earth. Less clouds warm the Earth. The gamma rays are emitted by sources outside our solar system. The sun shields the Earth from gamma rays by the solar wind and its magnetic field. When the sun is less active, more gamma rays enter the Earth’s atmosphere.
So why can’t they use this knowledge for rain on places like Texas now...and wherever drought cripples the land?
“When its output fluctuates, everything in the solar system is affected.”
Well, that’s not fair. We need to organize for solar justice.
C’mon, Ernest! You know the big bucks can’t be made from that whole “sun” thing. We have to stick with the “man made” meme or poor Al will feel bad and any number of “green” industries will collapse overnight! Have you no pity? ;-)
Michael Crichton’s “State of Fear” 2004, thoroughly destroyed the AGW Fantasy.
It’s amazing, really, how the sun affects everything about our planet....no wonder God set it there... and it does “RULE the day.”
Yes! One of Chrichton’s many legacies!
The global warming crowd reminds me of the trade unions. If you threaten their money machine they’ll come after you with a vengeance. With billions in grants at stake they don’t care who they destroy.
Kinda harsh, but I think, deep down, we all know the sun has it coming...
I think that it was so cool that he stated that when Russia imploded, a new boogeyman was required. Voila, AGW!
Yup. The insidious folk who make money from fear ALWAYS need a new monster.
Would that be Cogitator? He still posts, but only occasionally. You can imagine that he was met with a lot of opposition. His posts were excellent however, and a good balance against the prevailing "wisdom" here on FR. He was good at keeping the skeptics honest.
The second primary factor involves converting that water gas (water vapor) into liquid water (cloud moisture). Now gamma rays help with the conversion of vapor to water. The more water vapor in the atmosphere, the more liquid water can be converted. Basically in a high gamma ray environment the atmosphere will have less water vapor and more water moisture.
In a nutshell - Your normal Texas rain was actually deposited in the Western Mountain ranges this year.
Some of us skeptics have always been honest. That was never the problem. Skeptics are not the ones who were caught red handed committing fraud.
Now keeping us skeptics correct is a noble and wise endeavor.
Yeah, with a real conclusion drawn directly from a real experiment that yielded real data.
Sad that it has to be smuggled in somewhat, but it still got through. The system's been bent, but it's not broken.
As yet, anyhoo.
You might be seeing a glimmer of light at the end of the tunnel. Watch to see if any of them become embarrassed over their earlier enthusiasm. If so, I suggest cultivating it. When the AGW believers hit that tipping point, AGW will fade into the sunlight like goldfish swallowing (1930s) or stuffing as many people as you can in a phone booth (1960s?)
Precisely. It’s a huge international con. The UN is, if not at the heart of it, the foremost tool of the cons.
I think most FReepers are not old enough to remember that.
I built a cloud chamber as my 9th grade science project. Over 50 years ago. Got the plans from Scientific Experimenter magazine. Used Radium from an old watch hand as a “ray” source. Didn’t have enough time to build my own Small Hadron Collider! Cloud chambers have been around a long time.
The implied null hypothesis - absent anthropogenic carbon, the planet's climate (not sure a planet can have a climate, but nevermind) - the planet's climate would be invariant, is nonsense.
All lines of inquiry - oceanographic, geologic, climatologic, archaeological, paleontologic - ALL measure HUGE, ENORMOUS, AND NEARLY CONSTANT CHANGE.
So - the minor variations observed in the instrumental period (1850-2011) DO NOT REQUIRE EXPLANATION.
They may have an explanation, and it is possible that the explanation involves humans, but, given the massive data set on prehistoric changes, that is the least likely explanation and therefore validation would require lots and lots of experimental (NOT computer modeled) data, which does not exist.
lies often never hold-up to scrutiny.
True that is, but some of us Freepers had surname ancestors that arrived to the New World during the Maunder Minimum. Perhaps that may have been what drove them further south. Scotland was probably very cold back then. Coincidentally, Ireland has just had one of its coldest summers ever.
It imploded the moment we found notes in their code about how they were skewing the data reporting in order to introduce a confirmation bias.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.