Greenhouse theory smashed by biggest stone

Space and Earth science : March 14, 2006 ^ | 14 March 2006 | Vladimir Shaidurov of the Russian Academy of Sciences

[haole]

A new theory to explain global warming was revealed at a meeting at the University of Leicester (UK) and is being considered for publication in the journal "Science First Hand". The controversial theory has nothing to do with burning fossil fuels and atmospheric carbon dioxide levels.

According to Vladimir Shaidurov of the Russian Academy of Sciences, the apparent rise in average global temperature recorded by scientists over the last hundred years or so could be due to atmospheric changes that are not connected to human emissions of carbon dioxide from the burning of natural gas and oil. Shaidurov explained how changes in the amount of ice crystals at high altitude could damage the layer of thin, high altitude clouds found in the mesosphere that reduce the amount of warming solar radiation reaching the earth's surface.

Shaidurov has used a detailed analysis of the mean temperature change by year for the last 140 years and explains that there was a slight decrease in temperature until the early twentieth century. This flies in the face of current global warming theories that blame a rise in temperature on rising carbon dioxide emissions since the start of the industrial revolution. Shaidurov, however, suggests that the rise, which began between 1906 and 1909, could have had a very different cause, which he believes was the massive Tunguska Event, which rocked a remote part of Siberia, northwest of Lake Baikal on the 30th June 1908.

The Tunguska Event, sometimes known as the Tungus Meteorite is thought to have resulted from an asteroid or comet entering the earth's atmosphere and exploding. The event released as much energy as fifteen one-megaton atomic bombs. As well as blasting an enormous amount of dust into the atmosphere, felling 60 million trees over an area of more than 2000 square kilometres. Shaidurov suggests that this explosion would have caused "considerable stirring of the high layers of atmosphere and change its structure." Such meteoric disruption was the trigger for the subsequent rise in global temperatures.

Global warming is thought to be caused by the "greenhouse effect". Energy from the sun reaches the earth's surface and warms it, without the greenhouse effect most of this energy is then lost as the heat radiates back into space. However, the presence of so-called greenhouse gases at high altitude absorb much of this energy and then radiate a proportion back towards the earth's surface. Causing temperatures to rise.

Many natural gases and some of those released by conventional power stations, vehicle and aircraft exhausts act as greenhouse gases. Carbon dioxide, natural gas, or methane, and chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) are all potent greenhouse gases. Carbon dioxide and methane are found naturally in the atmosphere, but it is the gradual rise in levels of these gases since the industrial revolution, and in particular the beginning of the twentieth century, that scientists have blamed for the gradual rise in recorded global temperature. Attempts to reverse global warming, such as the Kyoto Protocol, have centred on controlling and even reducing CO2 emissions.

However, the most potent greenhouse gas is water, explains Shaidurov and it is this compound on which his study focuses. According to Shaidurov, only small changes in the atmospheric levels of water, in the form of vapour and ice crystals can contribute to significant changes to the temperature of the earth's surface, which far outweighs the effects of carbon dioxide and other gases released by human activities. Just a rise of 1% of water vapour could raise the global average temperature of Earth's surface more then 4 degrees Celsius.

The role of water vapour in controlling our planet's temperature was hinted at almost 150 years ago by Irish scientist John Tyndall. Tyndall, who also provided an explanation as to why the sky is blue, explained the problem: "The strongest radiant heat absorber, is the most important gas controlling Earth's temperature. Without water vapour, he wrote, the Earth's surface would be 'held fast in the iron grip of frost'." Thin clouds at high altitude allow sunlight to reach the earth's surface, but reflect back radiated heat, acting as an insulating greenhouse layer.

Water vapour levels are even less within our control than CO2 levels. According to Andrew E. Dessler of the Texas A & M University writing in 'The Science and Politics of Global Climate Change', "Human activities do not control all greenhouse gases, however. The most powerful greenhouse gas in the atmosphere is water vapour, he says, "Human activities have little direct control over its atmospheric abundance, which is controlled instead by the worldwide balance between evaporation from the oceans and precipitation."

As such, Shaidurov has concluded that only an enormous natural phenomenon, such as an asteroid or comet impact or airburst, could seriously disturb atmospheric water levels, destroying persistent so-called 'silver', or noctilucent, clouds composed of ice crystals in the high altitude mesosphere (50 to 85km). The Tunguska Event was just such an event, and coincides with the period of time during which global temperatures appear to have been rising the most steadily - the twentieth century. There are many hypothetical mechanisms of how this mesosphere catastrophe might have occurred, and future research is needed to provide a definitive answer.

Source: University of Leicester

[King Prout]

um.
I have read (on a JPL website) that Mars and at least one of the rocky moons of one of the gas giants has appeared to undergo similar warming contemporaneous to that on earth.
this suggests a single cause: sol

[neverdem]

bfl

[free_at_jsl.com]

I knew it: Dihydro Monoxide rears it's ugly head again!

More info on Dihydrogen Monoxide here.

[Nathan Zachary]

"The Tunguska Event, sometimes known as the Tungus Meteorite is thought to have resulted from an asteroid or comet entering the earth's atmosphere and exploding. The event released as much energy as fifteen one-megaton atomic bombs. As well as blasting an enormous amount of dust into the atmosphere, felling 60 million trees over an area of more than 2000 square kilometres."

This was an ausome event, of biblical proportions. It was the singnal of the beginning of the end times, Shortly after, ww1 started. Rejection of Christianity in europe started, and now much of the book of Daniel, which no-one could make sense of, now makes sense. It was sealed until end times as God ordered. Now the seals are popping open rapidly.

[Nathan Zachary]

" Look for a serious and concerted effort to smear Mr. Vladimir Shaidurov in the near future."

Why not? Those that follow the 200 year old "fossil fuel" theory, (and it has never been proven, or even updated in 200 years) have been trashing the "oil is a renewable resource, produced by high preasure and basement rock formations" Russian theory, (which is being proved more and more each year) as well. There is no ol shortage. But if oil were to be always 'running out" then much more money can be made. If oil was forever abundant, well, where would the price go?

See Abiotic Oil

And oil not soon tapped out

very promising Gas Resources Corporation

And very interesting on many levels Deep drilling springs surprises

There is plenty to learn before we start letting kooks run the world.

[PatrickHenry]

Interesting. listworthy?

Coulda been a contender. But already posted on March 14: Greenhouse theory smashed by biggest stone (most potent greenhouse gas is H2O).
And (also on March 14): Greenhouse theory smashed by biggest stone.

And (I posted this one on March 13) Greenhouse theory smashed by biggest stone [meteorite, not human emissions].

[El Gato]

Impossible. Tunguska was clearly Tesla trying to contact that polar expedition from his tower and it all went badly wrong.

Doesn't matter to this guy's argument. Whatever it was, it happened, and it had the potential to disrupt the upper atmosphere.

[El Gato]

How does one measure climate changes over thousands of years?

Lots of ways. Measuring tree rings for one, although that one is better for decades or hundreds of years. Lots of other surrogates for average temperature. See Scotese for other examples.

[El Gato]

It blew down how many trees? About 20 kt worth? Hmmmm.

Nearly three orders of magnitude off. Estimates vary 5-15 MT being common. Shaiduro uses 15 MT as his estimate. (Link is to the paper under discussion)

[patton]

That is a big ping.

[El Gato]

That is a big ping.

It would certainly get the attention of the moderators, who would then let slip the Kitties of Zot.

[uptoolate]

So we can tell if the average world temperature today is warmer or cooler than it was 4 or 5 thousand years ago? How accurate can it get? Are we talking in general terms or can we get to the tenth, hundreth, ect... of a degree?

Are there any circumstances that could throw any of those Scotese tests out of wack, such as high volcanic activity or maybe the earths tilt has not always been where it is today? I heard someone say that maybe the earth 'wobbles' slightly on its axis. If that is true, how do we know it 'wobbles' at the same rate today as it did 100,000 years ago?

[SunkenCiv]

GGG managers are SunkenCiv, StayAt HomeMother & Ernest_at_the_Beach	join list or digest view topics view or post blog bookmark post a topic subscribe
Note: this topic is from 3/30/2006. Thanks haole. According to Vladimir Shaidurov of the Russian Academy of Sciences, the apparent rise in average global temperature recorded by scientists over the last hundred years or so could be due to... a very different cause, which he believes was the massive Tunguska Event, which rocked a remote part of Siberia, northwest of Lake Baikal on the 30th June 1908. The Tunguska Event, sometimes known as the Tungus Meteorite is thought to have resulted from an asteroid or comet entering the earth's atmosphere and exploding. The event released as much energy as fifteen one-megaton atomic bombs. As well as blasting an enormous amount of dust into the atmosphere, felling 60 million trees over an area of more than 2000 square kilometres. Shaidurov suggests that this explosion would have caused "considerable stirring of the high layers of atmosphere and change its structure." Such meteoric disruption was the trigger for the subsequent rise in global temperatures. To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list.

[SunkenCiv]

Note: this topic is from 3/30/2006.

Thanks haole.

According to Vladimir Shaidurov of the Russian Academy of Sciences, the apparent rise in average global temperature recorded by scientists over the last hundred years or so could be due to... a very different cause, which he believes was the massive Tunguska Event, which rocked a remote part of Siberia, northwest of Lake Baikal on the 30th June 1908. The Tunguska Event, sometimes known as the Tungus Meteorite is thought to have resulted from an asteroid or comet entering the earth's atmosphere and exploding. The event released as much energy as fifteen one-megaton atomic bombs. As well as blasting an enormous amount of dust into the atmosphere, felling 60 million trees over an area of more than 2000 square kilometres. Shaidurov suggests that this explosion would have caused "considerable stirring of the high layers of atmosphere and change its structure." Such meteoric disruption was the trigger for the subsequent rise in global temperatures.

---

join or quit view topics view or post blog bookmark post new topic subscribe

---

[ThanhPhero]

A Russian fellow named Lysenko is the father of modern Politically True Science.

[gleeaikin]

I would think that huge amounts of dust thrown into the upper atmosphere would cause cooling not warming as happened with Mt. Pinatubo.

[AFreeBird]

Tree rings, ice cores...

[PigRigger]

Hmmm..... Water vapor is the biggest greenhouse gas...wow...how could we not have seen this.../s

Let's see....from my days in Geology and studying paleoclimatology....apparently there is a natural cycle at play here....obviously influenced by other forces...but here goes....

Over time the earth warms...this can be caused by greater solar energy...the earths wobble...and such....as the earth warms...more liquid water is made avaiable...which leads to greater evaporation and water vapor & CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere....in turn....more clouds.....at a certain critical point....the cloud coverage begins to allow the earth to cool....as it cools....more snow and ice is laid upon the earth....the cooling period deepens..so the accumulated ice and snow (locking in CO2) lasts for longer periods of time....eventually...if the cooling period is dramatic enough....world wide glaciation occurs ushering in an ice age....

This cycle has been repeated many times throughout earths history....we are currently in the ending phase of a warm period.....the cooling cycle appears to come on suddenly and dramatically when compared to the slow warm up....

So whose hypothesis do I believe more...this gentleman's or the globull warming fanatics basing everything on CO2...you decide...