Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 52 (9178 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: Anig
Upcoming Birthdays: Theodoric
Post Volume: Total: 918,102 Year: 5,359/9,624 Month: 384/323 Week: 24/204 Day: 0/24 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   CERN on Global Warming
GDR
Member
Posts: 6206
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005


Message 1 of 47 (631729)
09-02-2011 5:13 PM


This column was in the paper today. I am a complete onlooker on the subject except to say that I firmly believe that we have a responsiblity to care for the planet.
What do you who study this stuff have to say?
Lorne Gunter, National Post Sept. 2, 2011 | Last Updated: Sept. 2, 2011 3:05 AM ET
Suppose an ossuary - an ancient burial box - containing the skeletal remains of Jesus of Nazareth was discovered. Its contents would prove a challenge to the central fact of Christianity, that Jesus was God made man who ascended to Heaven whole - bones and all - after his crucifixion.
That would be big news, right? The significance of it would be debated in religious circles around the world, as well as in newspapers and on 24/7 news channels. Or, it would be if the remains didn't come under the control of some Christian organization whose leaders had a vested interest in suppressing reports about the discovery.
One way or the other, though, some faithful Christians would deny the find was real. Then when that position was no longer defensible, they would continue to insist the bones were immaterial.
Something similar may be happening in the climate change debate, whose basic premise - that man-made carbon dioxide emissions are causing dangerous climate change - has become religious dogma to many scientists, politicians, activists and fundraisers.
Last week, 63 scientists from CERN, the unimpeachable European Organization for Nuclear Research, published a paper in the journal Nature that would seem to prove that the sun, and not humans, is the main "driver" of climate on Earth.
In short, cloud cover is the most important determinant of global warming or cooling. Tiny changes in the percentage of the Earth shielded by clouds (or not) can cause a variation in global temperatures of several degrees, down or up. Cosmic rays are the main cause of cloud formation - the more rays from outer space reaching our planet's atmosphere, the more clouds form and the cooler the surface becomes.
In turn, the amount of cosmic rays penetrating our atmosphere is determined by the sun's activity. When our sun is particularly active, its magnetic field diverts cosmic rays away from our atmosphere. This reduces cloud formation, permits more solar rays to reach Earth and increases global temperatures.
By comparison, the CERN team found human CO 2 emissions have little or no impact, or at the very least their impact as been greatly overestimated in the computer models that global-warming alarmists rely on to show dangerous future climate changes.
So why hasn't this been headline news around the world? After all, global warming and what to do about it has been perhaps the biggest public policy issue of the past decade, with the possible exception of the worldwide financial crisis. (Both revolve around whether more government intervention and spending is the best way to solve large-scale problems.)
In part, the lack of attention is due to the lead author's inherent caution. Like all good scientists, Jasper Kirkby, the British experimental particle physicist who heads up CERN's CLOUD project, is reluctant to run ahead of his data. At present, he is only prepared to assert that the CLOUD results are "a very important first step" to demonstrating the sun's impact on global climate.
But even that assertion is a major challenge to the climate orthodoxy promoted by the UN's IPCC and much of the eco-science establishment. For years, warming alarmists in the environmental science community pressured CERN not to fund the CLOUD experiment, which recreated the Earth's atmosphere in a controlled chamber, then tested various theories about the sources of clouds.
Beyond Kirkby's modesty and prudence, CERN director general Rolf-Dieter Heuer ordered the scientists who worked on the project to "present the results clearly, but not to interpret them." Interpretation of the results - i.e. explaining how the experiment indicates that the sun and not mankind causes global warming - "would go immediately into the highly political arena of the climate change debate." He instructed them in all public statements "to make clear that cosmic radiation is only one of many parameters."
It's hard to imagine, though, the CERN scientists being similarly gagged if their experiment had supported the politically correct belief that human activity is the main cause of climate change. Scientists whose work backs the alleged scientific consensus feel free to interpret their results all the time. They frequently claim their findings prove the need for urgent, expensive and intrusive government regulation of private decisions and actions. So why the muzzle on the CERN crew?
If nothing else, the CERN study demonstrates that claims that climate-change science is "settled" are premature.
lgunter@shaw.ca
Home | The National Post Home Page | National Post
Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Add lots of blank lines.

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by hooah212002, posted 09-02-2011 5:22 PM GDR has not replied
 Message 3 by Dr Adequate, posted 09-02-2011 5:35 PM GDR has not replied
 Message 4 by cavediver, posted 09-02-2011 5:41 PM GDR has replied
 Message 7 by NoNukes, posted 09-02-2011 6:04 PM GDR has replied
 Message 15 by Buzsaw, posted 09-02-2011 10:01 PM GDR has not replied
 Message 18 by PaulK, posted 09-03-2011 2:23 AM GDR has not replied
 Message 20 by Theodoric, posted 09-03-2011 9:20 AM GDR has not replied

  
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 910 days)
Posts: 3193
Joined: 08-12-2009


(1)
(2)
Message 2 of 47 (631731)
09-02-2011 5:22 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by GDR
09-02-2011 5:13 PM


Good lord man with the copypasta. Clean that shiz up.
{abe}
A few things immediately jump out:
Edited by hooah212002, : No reason given.

"Why don't you call upon your God to strike me? Oh, I forgot it's because he's fake like Thor, so bite me" -Greydon Square

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by GDR, posted 09-02-2011 5:13 PM GDR has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 393 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 3 of 47 (631735)
09-02-2011 5:35 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by GDR
09-02-2011 5:13 PM


"Why haven't you or I heard about this thing that I have evidently heard about and am now telling you about? Why haven't you read in any newspaper this thing that you are presently reading in this newspaper? As a journalist, I must ask at the top of my voice why journalists are completely silent about the subject that I, a journalist, am presently talking about."
Fucking journalists.
Well, that's my critique of the rhetoric, I'll leave the science to scientists. And, if possible, I'll learn about their results from someone who isn't a blowhard. I note, for example, that the "politically correct" and "orthodox" scientific "establishment" has let them publish their results in Nature. Apparently the Thought Police dozed off.
---
ABE: Here's what the lead researcher says: "At the moment, it actually says nothing about a possible cosmic-ray effect on clouds and climate, but it's a very important first step."
Golly, it's like someone found absolutely nothing suggesting that Jesus had a grave. The media would have a field day ... actually, they probably would, if they could find a way to make it sound as though someone had.
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by GDR, posted 09-02-2011 5:13 PM GDR has not replied

  
cavediver
Member (Idle past 3752 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 4 of 47 (631737)
09-02-2011 5:41 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by GDR
09-02-2011 5:13 PM


What do you who study this stuff have to say?
I'm not a climate expert by any means, but when I read idot-speak like you have presented here, I tend to find something else to read.
In part, the lack of attention is due to the lead author's inherent caution.
so this idiot thinks that he is better placed to present the implications of the findings than the lead author?
There are nutters on both "sides" of the climate "debate". Restrict your reading to those that sound like they can communicate in something other than soundbites and you won't got too far wrong.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by GDR, posted 09-02-2011 5:13 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by GDR, posted 09-02-2011 5:48 PM cavediver has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6206
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005


Message 5 of 47 (631740)
09-02-2011 5:48 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by cavediver
09-02-2011 5:41 PM


Frankly I spent a fair bit of time with Google trying to find the original articel but with no luck. There are a number of blogs talking about it. Here is another article.
Alarmists Got it Wrong, Humans Not Responsible for Climate Change: CERN

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by cavediver, posted 09-02-2011 5:41 PM cavediver has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by cavediver, posted 09-02-2011 5:57 PM GDR has replied
 Message 8 by Dr Adequate, posted 09-02-2011 6:16 PM GDR has not replied

  
cavediver
Member (Idle past 3752 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


(1)
Message 6 of 47 (631742)
09-02-2011 5:57 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by GDR
09-02-2011 5:48 PM


Did you see Cern's press release? Some good links there.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by GDR, posted 09-02-2011 5:48 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by GDR, posted 09-02-2011 6:44 PM cavediver has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 7 of 47 (631743)
09-02-2011 6:04 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by GDR
09-02-2011 5:13 PM


On looker??
I am a complete onlooker on the subject...
Yet, this isn't the first thread you've started based on an article suggesting that there is a global warming scan, is it? Do you ever come across any other kind of interesting climate change news?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by GDR, posted 09-02-2011 5:13 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by GDR, posted 09-02-2011 6:51 PM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 393 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 8 of 47 (631747)
09-02-2011 6:16 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by GDR
09-02-2011 5:48 PM


Frankly I spent a fair bit of time with Google trying to find the original articel but with no luck.
Here.
That's just the abstract, you'd have to pay for the article.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by GDR, posted 09-02-2011 5:48 PM GDR has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by Theodoric, posted 09-02-2011 6:43 PM Dr Adequate has replied
 Message 13 by Coragyps, posted 09-02-2011 7:06 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9341
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 9 of 47 (631748)
09-02-2011 6:43 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by Dr Adequate
09-02-2011 6:16 PM


So does this have anything to do with global warming?

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Dr Adequate, posted 09-02-2011 6:16 PM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by Dr Adequate, posted 09-04-2011 3:48 PM Theodoric has not replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6206
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005


Message 10 of 47 (631749)
09-02-2011 6:44 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by cavediver
09-02-2011 5:57 PM


cavediver writes:
Did you see Cern's press release? Some good links there.
That was helpful. Thanks
I watched a couple of videos and read the article.
Here is a paragraph from the article that makes it sound like it is not nearly as clear as the column that I used to start this thread indicated.
quote:
It was a big surprise to find that aerosol formation in the lower atmosphere isn’t due to sulphuric acid, water and ammonia alone, said Kirkby. Now it’s vitally important to discover which additional vapours are involved, whether they are largely natural or of human origin, and how they influence clouds. This will be our next job.
It looks like CERN will return its enormous cost many times over. It is also good to get a report on climate change that employs leading edge technology being done by those with no political or economic axe to grind.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by cavediver, posted 09-02-2011 5:57 PM cavediver has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by hooah212002, posted 09-02-2011 6:55 PM GDR has not replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6206
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005


(3)
Message 11 of 47 (631750)
09-02-2011 6:51 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by NoNukes
09-02-2011 6:04 PM


Re: On looker??
NoNukes writes:
Yet, this isn't the first thread you've started based on an article suggesting that there is a global warming scan, is it? Do you ever come across any other kind of interesting climate change news?
There are going to be those on this forum that will argue against man caused climate change but I doubt that there are many that have the actual expertise to refute an article that supports the concept.
However, if I post an article that is against the concept, I will get the opinions of people who IMHO do know what they are talking about.
I do have a bias in that I hope we aren't causing it because it will mean a huge dispruption in our society in order to remedy the situation and I hope that it isn't necessary, but beyond that, with no expertise of my own I'm just trying to sort out the most likley truth.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by NoNukes, posted 09-02-2011 6:04 PM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 910 days)
Posts: 3193
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 12 of 47 (631751)
09-02-2011 6:55 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by GDR
09-02-2011 6:44 PM


It looks like CERN will return its enormous cost many times over. It is also good to get a report on climate change that employs leading edge technology being done by those with no political or economic axe to grind.
OF COURSE....It's science....

"Why don't you call upon your God to strike me? Oh, I forgot it's because he's fake like Thor, so bite me" -Greydon Square

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by GDR, posted 09-02-2011 6:44 PM GDR has not replied

  
Coragyps
Member (Idle past 843 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 13 of 47 (631752)
09-02-2011 7:06 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by Dr Adequate
09-02-2011 6:16 PM


you'd have to pay for the article.
Or get Coragyps to email you a pdf.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Dr Adequate, posted 09-02-2011 6:16 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by GDR, posted 09-02-2011 7:32 PM Coragyps has not replied
 Message 22 by Taz, posted 09-03-2011 11:50 PM Coragyps has not replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6206
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005


Message 14 of 47 (631753)
09-02-2011 7:32 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by Coragyps
09-02-2011 7:06 PM


That would be great if you could.
My e-mail address is on my profile.
Thanks so much.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by Coragyps, posted 09-02-2011 7:06 PM Coragyps has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 15 of 47 (631758)
09-02-2011 10:01 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by GDR
09-02-2011 5:13 PM


Sun's Cosmic Rays=High Clouds=Global Warming
GDR writes:
In short, cloud cover is the most important determinant of global warming or cooling. Tiny changes in the percentage of the Earth shielded by clouds (or not) can cause a variation in global temperatures of several degrees, down or up. Cosmic rays are the main cause of cloud formation - the more rays from outer space reaching our planet's atmosphere, the more clouds form and the cooler the surface becomes.
In turn, the amount of cosmic rays penetrating our atmosphere is determined by the sun's activity. When our sun is particularly active, its magnetic field diverts cosmic rays away from our atmosphere. This reduces cloud formation, permits more solar rays to reach Earth and increases global temperatures.
I've been predicting global warming way back before the decades when science was going with global cooling, my hypothesis being a fast emerging pre-flood like greenhouse canopy over the planet as it was before the Noaic Flood. I've alluded to this over the years in some of the archived threads.
This was based partly on Revelation 16:8, predicting significant global warming. Other prophecies predict the drying up of rivers, severe drought and extensive burning up of grass & trees. For this reason, I appreciate this thread being in the Coffee Shop where I can contribute some Biblical insight.
According to the text, an angel of Jehovah will have power to effect our sun so as to heat up the earth. If this prophecy is as accurate as so many others which have either been fulfilled or obviously emerging into fulfillment regarding our planet, I have no doubt, whatsoever, that the earth will indeed get significantly warmer. So far it's on track to the point that science has changed it's tune from an emerging ice age to concerns about global warming.
I understand that a significant increase of cosmic rays from the sun
would cause an increase in high clouds, in turn, resulting in global warming.
quote:
High clouds are much colder than low clouds and the surface. They radiate less energy to space than low clouds do. The high clouds in this image are radiating significantly less thermal energy than anything else in the image. Because high clouds absorb energy so efficiently, they have the potential to raise global temperatures. In a world with high clouds, much of the energy that would otherwise escape to space is captured in the atmosphere. High clouds make the world a warmer place. If more high clouds were to form, more heat energy radiating from the surface and lower atmosphere toward space would be trapped in the atmosphere, and Earth’s average surface temperature would climb.
ASV Revelation 16:8
quote:
And the fourth poured out his bowl upon the sun; and it was given unto it to scorch men with fire.
Revelation 8:7
quote:
........and the third part of the earth was burnt up, and the third part of the trees was burnt up, and all green grass was burnt up.
As often is the case, we can receive insight on the future for our world in the Biblical record. There's a popular gospel quartet song, "I've Read The Back Of The Book," knowing how the future will play out.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by GDR, posted 09-02-2011 5:13 PM GDR has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by Taz, posted 09-03-2011 11:47 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024