open All Channels
seplocked Out of Pod Experience
blankseplocked CERN: "Oops, cosmic rays do cause global warming."
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic

Ademaro Imre
Caldari
Posted - 2011.08.30 20:16:00 - [1]
 

Edited by: Ademaro Imre on 30/08/2011 20:22:04
http://opinion.financialpost.com/2011/08/26/lawrence-solomon-science-now-settled/

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

http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/46953

Not exactly a statement or quote from CERN, but that is basically the summary of of experiments held at CERN, which finally went on after CERN buckled under western government pressure to not conduct for almost a decade.

Basically, the cosmoclimatology theory goes this way - cosmic rays that are emitted from space, cause global warming, and global cooling because the rays trigger aerosols to create clouds (despite water vapor being a greenhouse gas, there has been no explanation, until now how clouds form). The sun's activity modulates how many rays reach the atmosphere and specifically how many reach above surfaces of the water, through the solar wind. More activity of the sun means more solar wind, fewer rays reach the Earth and less clouds reflecting and absorbing heat, and more heat in the earth. Less activity, more rays, more clouds, more cooling.

Correlations exist throughout history, going back to the creation of the earth, and mass extinction events. For instance, during the Little Ice Age, paintings and art have an unusually high number of cumulus clouds in the paintings compared to before and after the Little Ice Age, that can not be attributed to any artistic trend. Mass extinction events on Earth correspond to the Earths entry and exit from the Milky Ways's arms (The sun and Earth travel at a faster speed around the galaxy than the rotation of the spiral arms and many more cosmic rays in arms). The effect of cosmic rays can be seen in mineral and chemical ions found in rock whose formation can also correlate to the Sun's movement.

However, if you believe or want any more study at CERN, Al Gore thinks you are racist.

Takseen
Posted - 2011.08.30 20:21:00 - [2]
 

Interesting. I'll be looking for some more info on this as it filters through the scientific community. Mind you, most of the steps you'd take to deal with global warming are still necessary to deal with the fossil fuel shortage. So don't expect energy ratings, recycling and renewable power generation to disappear.

Bane Necran
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.08.30 20:30:00 - [3]
 

Just the latest nail in the coffin for the man-made global warming theory. The big giveaway for me was discovering all the planets in our solar system are warming at the same rate the Earth is, which was a number of years ago now. Surely our pollution isn't causing the icecaps on Mars to melt at the same rate Earths are. It was brutal discussing the entire thing online for a very long time, so i'm glad to see more people cluing in lately. I think i even discussed it here once a year or two ago, and received the usual insults and ad hominem attacks.

There was also a recent study done by NASA showing another reason the theory is flawed.

Sidus Isaacs
Gallente
Posted - 2011.08.30 20:31:00 - [4]
 

The Sun's effect on the Earth is not new information. The Sun has a nifty cycle it goes through.

However, it is not the only thing affecting the climate on Earth, we are too.

Grimpak
Gallente
Midnight Elites
Echelon Rising
Posted - 2011.08.30 20:58:00 - [5]
 

Originally by: Sidus Isaacs
The Sun's effect on the Earth is not new information. The Sun has a nifty cycle it goes through.

However, it is not the only thing affecting the climate on Earth, we are too.


oh I don't doubt we are ****ing it up too.


the issue here is how much are we ****ing it up, compared with the other factors. my guess is "not that much".

baltec1
Posted - 2011.08.30 21:02:00 - [6]
 

Edited by: baltec1 on 30/08/2011 21:18:28
Originally by: Bane Necran
Just the latest nail in the coffin for the man-made global warming theory.


Nope. We have seen solar activity like what we have now before and it didn't result in what we see going on now. Another team has found that the variation associated with solar storms or across a solar cycle, produces less than a 1% change in the concentration of cloud condensation. Eveyone involved says more research is needed.

The biggest solar worry is how badly our communications are going to be impacted over the next decade or two.


stoicfaux
Gallente
Posted - 2011.08.30 21:47:00 - [7]
 

Originally by: Ademaro Imre

http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/46953




"...they have discovered that cosmic rays could have a role to play in climate by enhancing the production of potentially cloud-seeding aerosols." (emphasis added)

" Describing their findings in this week's Nature, the team has also found that our current understanding of the chemistry of these aerosols is inadequate and that manmade pollution could have a larger role in their formation than previously thought."


Don't jump to conclusions just yet.

None of the articles stated that cosmic rays account for 100% of global warming. For all we know, it just means that man-made global warming is just cooking us at a lower than expected rate.

Personally, I'd wait until NASA makes some official statement and/or that the cosmic ray data is solid enough that people add it to the models. Plus someone needs to replicate and/or verify the results of the first study.

As for the cosmic ray test being suppressed by the politicians, I have to remember that the Bush administration tried to gag NASA over global warming.

Messy way to conduct science, methinks.


Sidus Isaacs
Gallente
Posted - 2011.08.30 22:00:00 - [8]
 

Originally by: Grimpak
Originally by: Sidus Isaacs
The Sun's effect on the Earth is not new information. The Sun has a nifty cycle it goes through.

However, it is not the only thing affecting the climate on Earth, we are too.


oh I don't doubt we are ****ing it up too.


the issue here is how much are we ****ing it up, compared with the other factors. my guess is "not that much".


It is gonna be more soon if we do not do anything. Besides, thats not really the worst effect of how our society operates anyways.

Bane Necran
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.08.30 22:00:00 - [9]
 

You're such a neophobe, baltec1 Laughing

Pretty sure you were among the people i discussed this with before, and i'm not going to repeat myself. If the findings of NASA and CERN are so easily dismissed by you then there's nothing i can do.

baltec1
Posted - 2011.08.30 22:11:00 - [10]
 

Originally by: Bane Necran
You're such a neophobe, baltec1 Laughing

Pretty sure you were among the people i discussed this with before, and i'm not going to repeat myself. If the findings of NASA and CERN are so easily dismissed by you then there's nothing i can do.


Well its kinda hard to defunk an entire science when the very people who run an experiment say that their rusults are interesting but dont answer what the solar interaction means. Its very interesting stuff I'll give you that but we do have records that go back far enough to know that the current solar activies do not explain what is going on with the climate.

Undoubtdly the sun has an impact but there are many other facters too including us.

Ademaro Imre
Caldari
Posted - 2011.08.30 23:57:00 - [11]
 

Edited by: Ademaro Imre on 31/08/2011 00:06:27
Originally by: stoicfaux

As for the cosmic ray test being suppressed by the politicians, I have to remember that the Bush administration tried to gag NASA over global warming.

Messy way to conduct science, methinks.



The scientists haven't discounted the theory yet. And they only say that mankind may have a larger role in aerosol creation they they previously thought - but - they haven't said what they exactly think it is. Of course, this one series of experiments is not going to say that this is the only way clouds could form. We know exhaust stacks on ships can cause clouds to form because the pollutants can seed clouds - but - that will not explain cloud formation before ships, and places where ships have not sailed. There has been no explanation for the natural formation of clouds, and this is the only one that exists now.

A closer examination of the actual CLOUD research, also links the formation of clouds to sulfur ion concentrations above sea water. So - these researchers are not looking for a strict correlation between cosmic rays and cloud formation, because the cosmic rays have to first interact with cloud seeding materials. And marine life in the seawater that will cause large, very large concentrations of sulfur ions above the seawater which then interacts with cosmic rays can explain the rapid development of large cloud systems.

Many people are missing the huge implications of this research. This is the FIRST experiment (done outside of a university basement or mine shaft). These are the preliminary results! Imagine, if the same scrutiny and dismissive attitude was place on the original anthropogenic global warming theories on their first experiment. In the interests of science, will the IPCC demand more research into this theory? Of course not.

If you make a closer examination, you will see that the Bush administration has absolutely no involvement with NASA being sued for violating the array of Freedom of Information Acts. Its NASA, right now, today - that is hiding their climate research that has been conducted with public monies.

Takseen
Posted - 2011.08.31 06:43:00 - [12]
 

It'd be easier to take you seriously if there wasn't such a huge disconnect between what you're saying "anthropogenic global warming theory is DEAAAAAAAAAD" and what the people *who actually conducted the research* are saying "this is interesting but only explains a small fraction of cloud formation".


Malcanis
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2011.08.31 10:40:00 - [13]
 

Let me tell you about the time I woke up in the night and found my house was on fire and I was gonna call the fire brigade, but then I saw this guy running away and realised that he set my house on fire and I thought well it's not my fault my house is burning so I'm not gonna do anything about it.

RedClaws
Amarr
Macabre Votum
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2011.08.31 11:30:00 - [14]
 

That telegraph post is bloody ridiculous. "So called Man Made Global Warming" and such nonsense.

F*kin conservatives trying to brainwash people that don't know enough about to subject to realize they are being bull****ted by some blog.

Jada Maroo
Posted - 2011.08.31 17:13:00 - [15]
 

Edited by: Jada Maroo on 31/08/2011 17:19:54

The cult of global warming is nothing but a replacement religion for those who have none. And governments are all too eager to funnel money to scientists who will tow the line so that new tax scams and carbon credit ponzi schemes can be imposed.

Anyone who wants proof of this fraud need only look to their spiritual leader, AlGore, whose carbon footprint is bigger than my entire neighborhood.

Riedle
Minmatar
Paradox Collective
Posted - 2011.08.31 19:17:00 - [16]
 

Originally by: Bane Necran
Just the latest nail in the coffin for the man-made global warming theory. The big giveaway for me was discovering all the planets in our solar system are warming at the same rate the Earth is, which was a number of years ago now. Surely our pollution isn't causing the icecaps on Mars to melt at the same rate Earths are. It was brutal discussing the entire thing online for a very long time, so i'm glad to see more people cluing in lately. I think i even discussed it here once a year or two ago, and received the usual insults and ad hominem attacks.

There was also a recent study done by NASA showing another reason the theory is flawed.


Amen to that one. I got tired of the insults and childishness of the pro warming crowd and left. Felt like I was a holocaust denier. Ironically it was the viciousness of the attacks that confirmed it for me that AGW was and is a farce. Been saying it for years.

stoicfaux
Gallente
Posted - 2011.08.31 19:31:00 - [17]
 

Originally by: Riedle
Quote:

There was also a recent study done by NASA showing another reason the theory is flawed.


Amen to that one. I got tired of the insults and childishness of the pro warming crowd and left. Felt like I was a holocaust denier. Ironically it was the viciousness of the attacks that confirmed it for me that AGW was and is a farce. Been saying it for years.


No offense, but even though you've been saying it for years, I prefer to listen to these guys instead. I'll wait until NASA has something to say about the ramifications of the cosmic ray study.

It also doesn't help that the OP is misrepresenting the cosmic ray study's significance.


As for the planets are warming argument, check out item 40, or specifically this link. Also, the user comments are pretty interesting.



Riedle
Minmatar
Paradox Collective
Posted - 2011.08.31 23:58:00 - [18]
 

Edited by: Riedle on 31/08/2011 23:59:22
Quote:

No offense, but even though you've been saying it for years, I prefer to listen to these guys instead. I'll wait until NASA has something to say about the ramifications of the cosmic ray study.

It also doesn't help that the OP is misrepresenting the cosmic ray study's significance.


As for the planets are warming argument, check out item 40, or specifically this link. Also, the user comments are pretty interesting.


You can listen to whomever you like. I have done my research. I know the the alarmist approach has bastardized the science. it is appalling really.
I'm not here to try to convince you or anyone else. I don't care what you think. It will all come out, it always does. Nature doesn't seem to be cooperating and no matter where they decide to cherry pick their temperatures to suit their laughably wrong models sooner or later people will wise up. They already are.

My comment was on the viciousness of people who don't think I should be able to think the way that I do or that there is something wrong with me that I do think this way.

That's all.

Oh, and just so you know - NASA's primary mission these days? Outreach to the Muslim world. LOL
Pathetic what politics can do to science. And sad.

Taedrin
Gallente
Kushan Industrial
Posted - 2011.09.01 03:28:00 - [19]
 

Selective reading, for the loss:
Quote:
"This change is very likely too small to explain the effect on clouds reported by Svensmark," he says. "We must continue to explore other potential physical connections between cosmic rays and clouds."

Kirkby shares Pierce's caution. He argues that CLOUD's results "say nothing about cosmic-ray effects on clouds" because the aerosols produced in the experiment are far too small to seed clouds. But he adds that the collaboration will have some "interesting new results" to present later this year regarding the role of organic molecules in aerosol formation. "What is needed now to settle this question are precise, quantitative measurements," he adds.


Cosmic rays cause global warming my ass. It's both the skeptics like you and the alarmists who make it so hard to do good science in this world, because you are both too busy taking things out of context for us to discover anything actually important.

The conclusion was that cosmic rays *COULD CONTRIBUTE* to global warming, and that further investigation was needed to determine exactly what roles cosmic rays play in cloud formation.

Seriously, you are almost as bad as the media reporters who claim that we've somehow exceeded the universal constant by shining light through a cold, dense gas - Or that we've managed to achieve FTL transmission of information through quantum teleportation (and causality be damned).

baltec1
Posted - 2011.09.01 08:40:00 - [20]
 

Edited by: baltec1 on 01/09/2011 08:44:47
Originally by: Riedle
Edited by: Riedle on 31/08/2011 23:59:22
Quote:

No offense, but even though you've been saying it for years, I prefer to listen to these guys instead. I'll wait until NASA has something to say about the ramifications of the cosmic ray study.

It also doesn't help that the OP is misrepresenting the cosmic ray study's significance.


As for the planets are warming argument, check out item 40, or specifically this link. Also, the user comments are pretty interesting.


You can listen to whomever you like. I have done my research. I know the the alarmist approach has bastardized the science. it is appalling really.
I'm not here to try to convince you or anyone else. I don't care what you think. It will all come out, it always does. Nature doesn't seem to be cooperating and no matter where they decide to cherry pick their temperatures to suit their laughably wrong models sooner or later people will wise up. They already are.

My comment was on the viciousness of people who don't think I should be able to think the way that I do or that there is something wrong with me that I do think this way.

That's all.

Oh, and just so you know - NASA's primary mission these days? Outreach to the Muslim world. LOL
Pathetic what politics can do to science. And sad.



The irony of this post is that the anti-climate change lobby does exactly this in the hope most people won't do the research into what they are saying. This very topic is a fine example of good science getting hijacked by people with an agenda.


Roosterton
Eternal Frontier
Posted - 2011.09.01 18:28:00 - [21]
 

The Earth has gone through continental splits, been hit by meteors (or something which wiped out an entire species of big scary things), has been through ice ages, and has driven many of its own species' into extinction, without the help of humans. (See: dinosaurs, mammoths.) Despite all that, life has adapted and evolved. I find the notion that certain parts of the world becoming one or two degrees warmer will throw entire ecosystems off balance to be rather silly.

I'm not saying that it's not a good idea to practice things like conserving oil and recycling, but acting as though global warming is a SERIOUS ISSUE and a THREAT TO DRIVE ALL OF EARTH TO EXTINCTION is quite stupid, and strikes me as people blowing things way out of proportion. Regardless of how much we're contributing to it.

baltec1
Posted - 2011.09.01 18:40:00 - [22]
 

Originally by: Roosterton
The Earth has gone through continental splits, been hit by meteors (or something which wiped out an entire species of big scary things), has been through ice ages, and has driven many of its own species' into extinction, without the help of humans. (See: dinosaurs, mammoths.) Despite all that, life has adapted and evolved. I find the notion that certain parts of the world becoming one or two degrees warmer will throw entire ecosystems off balance to be rather silly.

I'm not saying that it's not a good idea to practice things like conserving oil and recycling, but acting as though global warming is a SERIOUS ISSUE and a THREAT TO DRIVE ALL OF EARTH TO EXTINCTION is quite stupid, and strikes me as people blowing things way out of proportion. Regardless of how much we're contributing to it.


A 10 degree C change in global temp would wipe out 90% of life on earth.

stoicfaux
Gallente
Posted - 2011.09.01 20:55:00 - [23]
 

Originally by: Roosterton
The Earth has gone through continental splits, been hit by meteors (or something which wiped out an entire species of big scary things), has been through ice ages, and has driven many of its own species' into extinction, without the help of humans. (See: dinosaurs, mammoths.) Despite all that, life has adapted and evolved. I find the notion that certain parts of the world becoming one or two degrees warmer will throw entire ecosystems off balance to be rather silly.



It's not silly and has happened before.

Back in the Medieval Ages, Europe enjoyed a long warm spell that caused a population boom due to an extended growing season. Unfortunately, the Little Ice Age hit, shortened the growing season, and killed off a lot of people to starvation. Food riots in Europe caused social and government instability.

There was also the Year Without a Summer in which a volcano halfway around the world erupted and caused snow to fall in _June_ in New York and caused food riots in Europe. All from a 0.4 - 0.7 Celsius change in temperature.

Minor changes in temperature can cause severe weather fluctuations which can jeopardize farming.



My personal favorite Hypothetical Global Warming/Climate Change Doomsday Scenario:

Fresh water is heavier than salt water. So when the ice caps melt, the fresh water sinks to the bottom of the ocean which disrupts the Ocean Conveyor Belt. Currently the Conveyor Belt carries cold water to the equator and brings warm water back to the poles and acts like central air conditioning for the Earth. The Ocean Conveyor Belt creates Temperate weather which is good for growing crops.

However if the ice melts and the fresh water disrupts the Conveyor Belt, then the warm areas stay warm and get warmer, while the cold areas stay cold and get colder. Instead of having a nice Temperate zone to grow crops in, we wind up with areas that are either too hot or too cold to grow food. Plus, without the temperate zone, the hot and cold areas come into direct contact which creates really nasty, high energy weather (aka storms.)

Again, it's just a hypothetical scenario. We just don't know enough to say for sure what effects and have severe those effects would be from even minor climate changes. But we do know that even small, natural climate changes can have a significant impact on humanity.


If climate change/global warming does disrupt the global food supply, it may not be enough to cause human extinction, but a planet full of starving, desperate people and armies with machine guns and nukes makes for a potentially bad situation. The lack of a reliable food supply can knock modern, hyper-specialized, Just-in-Time supply chain, civilization back into a pre-industrial dark age.

Rico Lah
Posted - 2011.09.02 09:49:00 - [24]
 

Edited by: Rico Lah on 02/09/2011 09:49:15
This comic sums up my position on this matter pretty well. Although no one has proved that we're doing a whole lot on the global scale yet to my satisfaction. [More Research Required] But yeah, the planet's going to survive regardless. The thing everyone can't face is their own mortality imo.

Riedle
Minmatar
Paradox Collective
Posted - 2011.09.02 11:36:00 - [25]
 

Run away run away!

The sky is falling for nigh on 20 years now! lol

oh yeah, but it hasn't even been warming for the past 10

oops

Pantload
Gallente
Handsome Millionaire Playboys
Flatline.
Posted - 2011.09.02 13:24:00 - [26]
 

Originally by: stoicfaux

My personal favorite Hypothetical Global Warming/Climate Change Doomsday Scenario:

Fresh water is heavier than salt water...



I'm no expert, but I'm pretty sure that salt water is more dense than fresh water. Salt water will sink in fresh water.

stoicfaux
Gallente
Posted - 2011.09.02 13:38:00 - [27]
 

Originally by: Pantload
Originally by: stoicfaux

My personal favorite Hypothetical Global Warming/Climate Change Doomsday Scenario:

Fresh water is heavier than salt water...



I'm no expert, but I'm pretty sure that salt water is more dense than fresh water. Salt water will sink in fresh water.


Doh! You're right. Instead the sinking disruptive water is caused by increased salinity at the surface and increased sea ice.

Thermohaline circulation and fresh water

Again, it's just a theory, and probably not likely to happen.

baltec1
Posted - 2011.09.02 14:40:00 - [28]
 

Originally by: Riedle
Run away run away!

The sky is falling for nigh on 20 years now! lol

oh yeah, but it hasn't even been warming for the past 10

oops


You need to look at the last 200000 years to get the trend. The last 300ish years you will find a very large spike (in scientific terms). In the last 10 years we have seen record after record broken all over the planet but it is not evenly spread. For example the largest rises are at the poles while some places have seen a cooling trend because of global warming inpacting wind currents. Its a complicated matter and so easily miss-interpreted by people who don't want it to be true and people who make genuine mistakes.

Nerath Naaris
Pink Winged Unicorns for Peace Love and Anarchy
Posted - 2011.09.02 19:11:00 - [29]
 

Edited by: Nerath Naaris on 02/09/2011 19:12:05
Edited by: Nerath Naaris on 02/09/2011 19:11:33
Originally by: stoicfaux

My personal favorite Hypothetical Global Warming/Climate Change Doomsday Scenario:

Fresh water is heavier than salt water. So when the ice caps melt, the fresh water sinks to the bottom of the ocean which disrupts the Ocean Conveyor Belt. Currently the Conveyor Belt carries cold water to the equator and brings warm water back to the poles and acts like central air conditioning for the Earth. The Ocean Conveyor Belt creates Temperate weather which is good for growing crops.

However if the ice melts and the fresh water disrupts the Conveyor Belt, then the warm areas stay warm and get warmer, while the cold areas stay cold and get colder. Instead of having a nice Temperate zone to grow crops in, we wind up with areas that are either too hot or too cold to grow food. Plus, without the temperate zone, the hot and cold areas come into direct contact which creates really nasty, high energy weather (aka storms.)

Again, it's just a hypothetical scenario. We just don't know enough to say for sure what effects and have severe those effects would be from even minor climate changes. But we do know that even small, natural climate changes can have a significant impact on humanity.


Actually, this not purely hypothetical since something like this supposedly happened at the end of the last Ice Age, when a gigantic freshwater lake from what remains today as the Great Lakes region in northern America broke through into the Atlantic ocean.

Haxfar Portlaind
Posted - 2011.09.02 19:52:00 - [30]
 

One thing people tend to forget on the "whether CO2 causes global warming or not", is that the increase in CO2 is damaging to sea life that use calcium as a way to protect themselves. With the increase in CO2 in the atmosphere, there oceans absorbs more. And when Acoans start absorbing more CO2 than usual, its pH-value goes down.

Just something to consider, but hey, we should only worry for the warming, eh?


Pages: [1] 2

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only