Sun Causes Climate Change Shock

"Sun Causes Climate Change Shock"

If Michael Crichton had lived to write a follow-up to State of Fear, the plotline might well have gone like this: at a top secret, state of the art laboratory in Switzerland, scientists finally discover the true cause of “global warming”. It’s the sun, stupid. More specifically – as the Danish physicist Henrik Svensmark has long postulated – it’s the result of cosmic rays which act as a seed for cloud formation

The hypothesis that cosmic rays and the sun hold the key to the global warming debate has been Enemy No. 1 to the global warming

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.

blogs.telegraph.co.uk...



Starting a New Thread?...Look Here First


AboveTopSecret.com takes pride in making every post count.
Please do not create minimal posts to start your new thread.
If you feel inclined to make the board aware of news, current events,
or important information from other sites;
*please post one or two paragraphs,
*a link to the entire story,
*AND your opinion, twist or take on the news item,
as a means to inspire discussion or collaborative research on your subject.

The Climategate Emails

Very interesting, read this if you have time ..

The Climategate emails expose to our view a world that was previously hidden from virtually everyone. This formerly hidden world was made up of a very few players.
But they controlled those critical Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) processes involving the temperature records from the past, and the official interpretation of current temperature data. They exerted previously unrecognized influence on the “peer review” process for papers seeking publication in the officially recognised climate science literature from which the IPCC was supposed to rely exclusively in order to draw its conclusions.

1 The Climategate Emails and What they Mean Climategate began on 19 November 2009, when a whistle-blower leaked thousands of emails and documents central to a Freedom of Information request placed with the Climatic Research Unit of the University of East Anglia in the United Kingdom. This institution has played a central role in the “climate change” debate. Its scientists, together with their international colleagues, quite literally put the “warming” into Global Warming: they were responsible for analysing and collating the various measurements of temperature from around the globe and that, going back for many years, collectively underpinned the central scientific argument that mankind’s liberation of “greenhouse” gases—particularly carbon dioxide—was leading to a relentless, unprecedented and ultimately catastrophic warming of the entire planet. The key phrase here, from a scientific point of view, is that it is “unprecedented” warming. There is absolutely no doubt that mankind has liberated substantial quantities of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere over the past two centuries. But mankind did not “create” this carbon dioxide out of nothing. It was released by the burning of “fossil fuels”, which were created over millions of years from the remains of plants and animals (who themselves ultimately obtained their nutrition from those plants). So where did those plants get their energy and carbon dioxide from? They absorbed the radiant energy of the Sun, and breathed in carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, as plants continue to do today. In other words, when we burn fossil fuels, we are utilizing a small part of the solar energy that had been collected and stored by plants over millions of years, and in the process we are liberating into the atmosphere the carbon dioxide that those plants had absorbed from the atmosphere in the first place.

www.lavoisier.com.au...

great read and good find thankf or posting!

second

Oh my gosh. The sun controls our climate!?

We should tax it for carbon emissions!!!

reply to post by Dalke07

Thanks for posting the link to the article.

It's a fairly lengthy article, but it doesn't really say too much about the science, which is the part that interests me, it seems to be more focused on the politics.

Yes the politics is an issue, but the science is more important. Until I read the research I won't fully understand the claims being made. I'll look for it when I have some more time.

Until I read it, I can't really disagree with the head of CERN that climate models are complex and depend on a number of factors, not just one factor. On the other hand, I can't agree with his comment that the scientists shouldn't interpret their findings.

I have asked the CERN colleagues to present the results clearly, but not to interpret them. That would go immediately into the highly political arena of the climate change debate. One has to make clear that cosmic radiation is only one of many parameters. –Rolf-Dieter Heuer, Director General of CERN, Welt Online 15 July 2011

That seems pretty outrageous. They may be right or wrong in their interpretation, but they should be allowed to make their best interpretation just as any other scientist would be allowed to do.

I've never been convinced that climate change is or is not mostly caused by man, though we probably do contribute to the climate by some amount, I just don't know how much. It's a very complex system to model and even our best models are less than 100% accurate.

The sun has an INFLUENCE, but that doesn't mean that the global warming we see now is mainly caused by the sun

Of course deniers will try to spin it that way...

reply to post by MrXYZ


*sigh*

As soon as I see the word 'denier' I see someone basically saying their mind is made up regardless of any new evidence that may come out. I LOATHE loaded, propagandistic words like that.

The 2007 IPCC report even admitted at that 'solar irradiance' as an input had a low level of scientific understanding.

The sun made our planet from the spare bits when it formed itself, almost everything on earth is affected by the sun, if not directly, as a consiquence of knock on effects from other things.

Suns are cool.... no wait hawt, yeah hawt thats better

Originally posted by Jessica6
reply to post by MrXYZ

 

*sigh*

As soon as I see the word 'denier' I see someone basically saying their mind is made up regardless of any new evidence that may come out. I LOATHE loaded, propagandistic words like that.

The 2007 IPCC report even admitted at that 'solar irradiance' as an input had a low level of scientific understanding.

Again, where does it state the sun's the main cause of the change? It states the sun as a factor having an influence...not that the increase we're now seeing is mostly due to the sun.