The Other Climate Theory

"New, convincing evidence indicates global warming is caused by cosmic rays and the sun — not humans

The science is now all-but-settled on global warming, convincing new evidence demonstrates, but Al Gore, the IPCC and other global warming doomsayers won’t be celebrating. The new findings point to cosmic rays and the sun — not human activities — as the dominant controller of climate on Earth.

The research, published with little fanfare this week in the prestigious journal Nature, comes from über-prestigious CERN, the European Organization for Nuclear Research, one of the world’s largest centres for scientific research involving 60 countries and 8,000 scientists at more than 600 universities and national laboratories. CERN is the organization that invented the World Wide Web, that built the multi-billion dollar Large Hadron Collider, and that has now built a pristinely clean stainless steel chamber that precisely recreated the Earth’s atmosphere.

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."

http://opinion.financialpost.com/2011/08/26/lawrence-solomon-science-now-settled/

And here

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100102296/sun-causes-climate-change-shock/

Peer reviewed and published from one of the leading research centers in the world.

Can we stop the nonsense now?

 

Deniers obviously don't mind being lied to.  The CERN results...

http://www.realclimate.org/index.ph...rncloud-results-are-surprisingly-interesting/

Then there's the little problem that cosmic rays have been trending upward over the past 60 years, which would cause cooling if such a cosmic ray cloud change mechanism existed.

 

I love seeing fresh research come out that challenges the current state of climate science, very hopeful stuff.

But to believe that we should 'stop the nonsense' because a few studies come out that disagree/point out flaws with the current science is a bad approach. Let the scientific community go through these studies, nitpick, adapt their models, smooth out the kinks in their previous studies etc etc. One of the biggest problems with climate science in the public is the willingness of people to jump and go 'HAH! Told you so! Nyah nyah nyah!' whenever something new comes out that supports their preconceptions. Lets be patient and see what conclusions are drawn from the experts.

 

When something challenging arrives, we'll be sure to let you know. Meanwhile this misinterpretation by a reporter of a misrepresentation by a denialist blogger isn't it.

 

So...a denier is saying the earth IS getting warmer?

Step one.

 

Please do!

 

You know the other side is running scared when they post such hyperbole.

 

As proven by a bias'd blog you posted........laughable.

 

OK folks, let's forget about biased bloggers and get the story directly from the paper's lead author.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gXx62NhSkt8&feature=player_embedded#t=234s

It should be clear and obvious that the paper's lead author is not claiming to have found any link between cosmic rays and climate.

So folks, who are you going to listen to? "Bluesguy", or the dude who actually wrote the paper?

 

According to your graph prior to the 00s there was a strong decreasing trend in the 11 year cycle especially at the minimum. While the change in the maximums is small the change at the minimums is almost around 15%. Real climate is once again playing games ignoring the lul in global temperature rises that coincides with the uptick in GCRs over the last decade.

Realclimate hopes that you are dumb enough to think that there has been a strong positive trend in temperature over the last decade. The GCR uptick in the last decade explains the lack or warming that Dr. Trenberth calls a tragedy.

 

Cosmic rays peaked in 2010, and we had the warmest year on record. According to deniers, it should have been the coolest. Tragic for them, really.

Case closed.

 

Contrary to your denier cult delusions, the Earth has indeed warmed over the last decade. It would have warmed up even more if not for those Chinese aerosols reflecting some of the solar energy back into space. But they only temporarily mask the effects of the steadily rising CO2 levels. As the Chinese clean up their industrial pollution and the pace of their expansion slows, the heat trapping effect of the increased CO2 will manifest very quickly and temperatures will rise even faster.

Here's the actual scientific facts about the warming over the last decade.

Last year was tied with 2005 as the warmest year in at least the last 150 years and probably much more. It was over a degree warmer than the twentieth century average. The ten warmest years on record have all happened in the last 13 years. The last three decades have each in turn been the warmest decade on record. Global warming continues unabated as multiple lines of evidence attest beyond just the temperature record. Here's what the actual climate scientists report:



State of the Climate
Global Analysis - Annual 2010
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration - National Climatic Data Center

Global Temperatures

The year 2010 tied with 2005 as the warmest year since records began in 1880. The annual global combined land and ocean surface temperature was 0.62°C (1.12°F) above the 20th century average.[/COLOR][/size] The range associated with this value is plus or minus 0.07°C (0.13°F). The 2010 combined land and ocean surface temperature in the Northern Hemisphere was also the warmest on record, while the combined land and ocean surface temperature in the Southern Hemisphere was the sixth warmest such period on record. The annual globally averaged land temperature was 0.96°C (1.73°F) above average, which tied with 2005 as the second warmest year record. The range associated with this value is plus or minus 0.11°C (0.20°F). The warmest year was 2007, at 0.99°C (1.78°F) above the 20th century average. The decadal global land and ocean average temperature anomaly for 2001–2010 was the warmest decade on record for the globe, with a surface global temperature of 0.56°C (1.01°F) above the 20th century average. This surpassed the previous decadal record (1991–2000) value of 0.36°C (0.65°F).




The evidence for rapid climate change is compelling
NASA

Sea level rise
Global sea level rose about 17 centimeters (6.7 inches) in the last century. The rate in the last decade, however, is nearly double that of the last century.[4]

Global temperature rise
All three major global surface temperature reconstructions show that Earth has warmed since 1880.[5] Most of this warming has occurred since the 1970s, with the 20 warmest years having occurred since 1981 and with all 10 of the warmest years occurring in the past 12 years.[6] Even though the 2000s witnessed a solar output decline resulting in an unusually deep solar minimum in 2007-2009, surface temperatures continue to increase.[7]
The oceans have absorbed much of this increased heat, with the top 700 meters (about 2,300 feet) of ocean showing warming of 0.302 degrees Fahrenheit since 1969.

Warming oceans
The oceans have absorbed much of this increased heat, with the top 700 meters (about 2,300 feet) of ocean showing warming of 0.302 degrees Fahrenheit since 1969.[8]

Shrinking ice sheets
The Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets have decreased in mass. Data from NASA's Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment show Greenland lost 150 to 250 cubic kilometers (36 to 60 cubic miles) of ice per year between 2002 and 2006, while Antarctica lost about 152 cubic kilometers (36 cubic miles) of ice between 2002 and 2005.

Declining Arctic sea ice
Both the extent and thickness of Arctic sea ice has declined rapidly over the last several decades.[9]

Glacial retreat
Glaciers are retreating almost everywhere around the world — including in the Alps, Himalayas, Andes, Rockies, Alaska and Africa.[10]

Extreme events
The number of record high temperature events in the United States has been increasing, while the number of record low temperature events has been decreasing, since 1950. The U.S. has also witnessed increasing numbers of intense rainfall events.[11]

Ocean acidification
The carbon dioxide content of the Earth’s oceans has been increasing since 1750, and is currently increasing about 2 billion tons per year. This has increased ocean acidity by about 30 percent.[12]


NOAA: Past Decade Warmest on Record According to Scientists in 48 Countries
Earth has been growing warmer for more than fifty years
July 28, 2010
(government publication - free to reprint)

The 2009 State of the Climate report released today draws on data for 10 key climate indicators that all point to the same finding: the scientific evidence that our world is warming is unmistakable. More than 300 scientists from 160 research groups in 48 countries contributed to the report, which confirms that the past decade was the warmest on record and that the Earth has been growing warmer over the last 50 years.

Based on comprehensive data from multiple sources, the report defines 10 measurable planet-wide features used to gauge global temperature changes. The relative movement of each of these indicators proves consistent with a warming world. Seven indicators are rising: air temperature over land, sea-surface temperature, air temperature over oceans, sea level, ocean heat, humidity and tropospheric temperature in the “active-weather” layer of the atmosphere closest to the Earth’s surface. Three indicators are declining: Arctic sea ice, glaciers and spring snow cover in the Northern hemisphere.



“For the first time, and in a single compelling comparison, the analysis brings together multiple observational records from the top of the atmosphere to the depths of the ocean,” said Jane Lubchenco, Ph.D., under secretary of commerce for oceans and atmosphere and NOAA administrator. “The records come from many institutions worldwide. They use data collected from diverse sources, including satellites, weather balloons, weather stations, ships, buoys and field surveys. These independently produced lines of evidence all point to the same conclusion: our planet is warming,”

The report emphasizes that human society has developed for thousands of years under one climatic state, and now a new set of climatic conditions are taking shape. These conditions are consistently warmer, and some areas are likely to see more extreme events like severe drought, torrential rain and violent storms.

“Despite the variability caused by short-term changes, the analysis conducted for this report illustrates why we are so confident the world is warming,” said Peter Stott, Ph.D., contributor to the report and head of Climate Monitoring and Attribution of the United Kingdom Met Office Hadley Centre. “When we look at air temperature and other indicators of climate, we see highs and lows in the data from year to year because of natural variability. Understanding climate change requires looking at the longer-term record. When we follow decade-to-decade trends using multiple data sets and independent analyses from around the world, we see clear and unmistakable signs of a warming world.”

While year-to-year changes in temperature often reflect natural climatic variations such as El Niño/La Niña events, changes in average temperature from decade-to-decade reveal long-term trends such as global warming. Each of the last three decades has been much warmer than the decade before. At the time, the 1980s was the hottest decade on record. In the 1990s, every year was warmer than the average of the previous decade. The 2000s were warmer still.

“The temperature increase of one degree Fahrenheit over the past 50 years may seem small, but it has already altered our planet,” said Deke Arndt, co-editor of the report and chief of the Climate Monitoring Branch of NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center. “Glaciers and sea ice are melting, heavy rainfall is intensifying and heat waves are more common. And, as the new report tells us, there is now evidence that over 90 percent of warming over the past 50 years has gone into our ocean.”

More and more, Americans are witnessing the impacts of climate change in their own backyards, including sea-level rise, longer growing seasons, changes in river flows, increases in heavy downpours, earlier snowmelt and extended ice-free seasons in our waters.

 

If yo had bother to do a little research instead of just c&p, would find that NASA revised it's stats. They now say 1936 was the warmest year on record. BTW, who exactly, decided that our present climate is the optimal one?

 

If you had done any research you would know that this strawman was debunked four years ago when it was first perpetrated. NASA's revision referred to US temperatures, not global ones. No global maxima were affected by the change.
Fail.

 

If cosmic rays produce upper level clouds,and these clouds cool the atmosphere, how long would the thermal lag be?

Days, months, years?

Just askin.

And was this El-Nino warmer or cooler than others ?

 

But you still didn't answer the question of who decided that this is the optimal climate for this planet. The climate of this planet has been changing for almost 4 billion years, the absurd assution that man is affecting it any meaningful way is just that, absurd.

 

Are you really serious? You believe that human deforestation, the re-release of carbon that has been stored for millions of years, has no effect on the climate?

I guess overfishing also has no effect on fish populations either. Fish breed all the time.
Man is not neutral when it comes to his environment.

 

You are entitled to your beliefs, but like the earlier poster, you fail to answer the question. Who decided that this is the optimal climate for the planet?

 

Your head is filled with misinformation and meaningless propaganda memes.

If you had bothered to do some actual research instead of just believing some crap you scraped off of a denier cult blog, you would find that 1936 is very, very slightly warmer than some recent years but only in the continental United States which is only about 2% of the Earth's surface. Over the whole planet, 2005 is the warmest year on record and quite possibly the warmest year in thousands of years.

No one is concerned with the "optimal climate for the planet". That is just fuzzy-minded denier cult BS. The fact is, it was the general relative stability of the climate patterns over the last 6 or 8 thousand years that allowed the development of agriculture, human civilization and cities. Today we have about 7 billion people living on Earth who are very dependent on stable rainfall patterns and reliable water sources from mountain glacier fed rivers. The climate of the last several centuries could be said to be the optimal climate for our civilization and populations. It is primarily mankind's burning of fossil fuels, putting hundreds of billions of tons of fossil carbon into our atmosphere, and our deforestation practices that have induced global warming and started a series of changes in the Earth's climate patterns that is already disrupting world food supplies and threatens to produce mass starvation on a scale never seen before. The climate changes will continue to get worse and worse as the planet continues to heat up over the coming decades and centuries. Sea levels are rising and threaten to eventually destroy trillions of dollars of coastal infrastructure. A great many of the world's largest cities are built on the coastlines. A large percentage of the world's populations live within 20 miles of the ocean.

You are entitled to your beliefs but you should know that your beliefs have been deliberately manipulated by the people who are making billions selling fossil fuels. Try reading some of the actual science instead of that denier cult blog bilge.

 

That's an extremely silly question that deniers keep recycling.

The question that *should* be asked is, "What is the optimum climate for human civilization?". And the answer, of course, is the climate that the current human civilization grew up with, the climate that trillions of dollars of infrastructure was designed and built for.

Transforming the climate to, say, a hothouse climate of the Cretaceous or Eocene, would render much of the world (including regions where billions of people now live) uninhabitable by humans, with dew points higher than what human beings can tolerate. If we were to continue on a BAU (Business As Usual) path, it could well be possible to get to a climate like that within the lifespans of the (future) grandchildren or great-grandchildren of some of the posters here.

If the Earth's current climate were suddenly transformed to a Cretaceous/Eocene hothouse climate, billions of people would die of heat stroke long before they had a chance to starve to death.

Reference: http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/04/26/0913352107.full.pdf

 

We've had forest fires for billions of years, so it's absurd to think that man can cause forest fires.

We've had background radiation for billions of years, so it's absurd to think that man can cause background radiation.

We've had genetic mutations for billions of years, so it's absurd to thing that man can cause genetic mutations.

 

Finally scientists are actually using science to understand the theory of climate change instead of the idiot claims of morons like Al Gore who want to blame everything on the evils of Western civilization.

Read and become informed instead of parroting the idiot talking points of the DNC and liberals:

The Other Climate Theory
Al Gore won't hear it, but heavenly bodies might be driving long-term weather trends.

By ANNE JOLIS
In April 1990, Al Gore published an open letter in the New York Times "To Skeptics on Global Warming" in which he compared them to medieval flat-Earthers. He soon became vice president and his conviction that climate change was dominated by man-made emissions went mainstream. Western governments embarked on a new era of anti-emission regulation and poured billions into research that might justify it. As far as the average Western politician was concerned, the debate was over.

But a few physicists weren't worrying about Al Gore in the 1990s. They were theorizing about another possible factor in climate change: charged subatomic particles from outer space, or "cosmic rays," whose atmospheric levels appear to rise and fall with the weakness or strength of solar winds that deflect them from the earth. These shifts might significantly impact the type and quantity of clouds covering the earth, providing a clue to one of the least-understood but most important questions about climate. Heavenly bodies might be driving long-term weather trends.

The theory has now moved from the corners of climate skepticism to the center of the physical-science universe: the European Organization for Nuclear Research, also known as CERN. At the Franco-Swiss home of the world's most powerful particle accelerator, scientists have been shooting simulated cosmic rays into a cloud chamber to isolate and measure their contribution to cloud formation. CERN's researchers reported last month that in the conditions they've observed so far, these rays appear to be enhancing the formation rates of pre-cloud seeds by up to a factor of 10. Current climate models do not consider any impact of cosmic rays on clouds.

The rest of the story:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100...6554750502443800.html?mod=djemEditorialPage_h

 

Well, when learning the truth about science, we could go to the Wall Street Journal, I suppose.

Or, we could actually talk to the scientist himself who did the research: Dr. Jasper Kirkby of Simon Fraser University.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gXx62NhSkt8"]Kirkby on Cosmic Rays - YouTube[/ame]

"It's important to stress that we're only looking at the moment at the production of nonometer-sized embryonic particles. These are far too small to seed cloud droplets at this stage. So at the moment it actually says nothing at all about a possible cosmic ray effect on clouds and therefore climate." (3:54)

OMG! The Wall Street Journal got a science story wrong? How could that happen?

 

Actually, it didn't. Kirkby is solely a scientist, not an activist/scientist. Some of his hypothesizes for this experiment is that that cloud formation through cosmic rays may possibly be up to half or the whole of temperature fluctuations.

The comment you quoted is his statement of the experiment to date. He also stated solely on this data, all of today's climate models need serious adjustment because the data they use for cloud creation is flat out wrong or cloud impact is entirely left out.

 

http://press.web.cern.ch/press/pressreleases/Releases2011/PR15.11E.html

http://public.web.cern.ch/public/en/research/CLOUD-en.html

Just in case someone wanted to actually go to the source in lieu of the various interpretations of the data.

Frankly, this experiment is being conducted honestly and openly. Sadly, if it produces hard proof that human contribution is minimal, it won't matter. Too many make way too much money and control off this movement.

Its turned into a religion.