[andyt]

Anybody know much about this:

Quote:

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://www.eutimes.net/2011/09/cern-the ... l-warming/

[BartSimpson]

But, but (sputter with rage) the science is IN!! The debate is OVER!! How dare these charlatans, these HERETICS!!! Say such a thing!!!


...figured I'd get it in before Eureka shows up.

[andyt]

So, according to this article, for us to see the warming we are seeing the Sun should have been putting out less cosmic rays and thus less clouds on earth leading to warming, according to them. So has the Sun been putting out less cosmic rays? And I thought clouds serve to heat up a planet, since they allow visible light thru, but reflect IR back to earth? I thought Venus, an example global warming run amok was a very cloudy planet.

I wonder if this is a totally cockeyed analysis of what these scientists really reported?

[DanSC]

The impending flame war will be larger than a dozen Earths.

[andyt]

Finally found some sensible commentary:

Quote:

It is a pity that some commentators were not consistent in their approach to the two findings of this experiment. Nucleation is low so other factors might amplify the effect. There is a Cosmic Ray effect that forms condensation nuclei, but they are too small to act as the seeds of clouds. But instead of saying that the chamber is not the atmosphere and the experiment not the whole story or the last word on this demonstrated effect, they argue that the nuclei are too small and that is the end of it. To my mind this is a clear example of bias and scientific double standards. Neither experiment here is the final word.

This experiment isn't something either side can hang their hat on as case proven.

[BartSimpson]

andyt wrote:

This experiment isn't something either side can hang their hat on as case proven.

The only thing proven here is that legitimate, qualified, and prestigious institutions have doubts about the CO2 theory to the point that they're willing to look in other directions...which is what scientists should do.

[andyt]

To me this just shows how little we know. I think we should be doing our best to reduce CO2 output, but in a manner that doesn't do us too much harm either. And either way, looking at adapting to a warming planet seems like a prudent thing to do.

[DrCaleb]

BartSimpson wrote:

andyt wrote:

This experiment isn't something either side can hang their hat on as case proven.

The only thing proven here is that legitimate, qualified, and prestigious institutions have doubts about the CO2 theory to the point that they're willing to look in other directions...which is what scientists should do.

Actually, it proves that Reporters should never teach Science classes.

Quote:

Early results seem to indicate that cosmic rays do cause a change. The high-energy protons seemed to enhance the production of nanometre-sized particles from the gaseous atmosphere by more than a factor of ten. But, Kirkby adds, those particles are far too small to serve as seeds for clouds. "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," he says.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/artic ... osmic-rays

And that people have short memories, because we've been here before. Recently.

viewtopic.php?t=97514

[andyt]

Or just missed that post, since it didn't get much attention.

[Tricks]

Stuff like this is why I haven't made up my mind. I'll wait till CERN has something conclusive.

[Zipperfish]

andyt wrote:

Anybody know much about this:

Quote:

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://www.eutimes.net/2011/09/cern-the ... l-warming/

You can smell the desperation from here, Andy. First of all the breathless announcement: "little fanfare," "prestigious journal," "uber-prestigious CERN."

Uberprestigious, for fuck sake?

If you got some new scientific evidence to convey, how about just telling us without the fucking parade and big band accompaniment.

This is not exactly breaking news, Andy. But if any of you deniers would spend ten minutes actually learning about the actual science involved instead of scouring the internet for cut-and-paste opportunities, you might know that.

"Anybody know anything about this"? Well obviously you fucking don't, and since you reject science anyways, it seems kind of pointless for anyone to waste their time explaining it. Here's a better idea. Get off your fucking lazy ass and learn about yourself. You got time--it's not like you got a fucking job or anything.

[andyt]

Holy shit, you're acting exactly like the deniers accuse the believers of - "I will not hear any contrary information"

I'm not a denier, on the whole I believe that humans putting CO2 into the atmosphere must be having some effect. Don't pretend to know how much and whether to believe the doomsayers or the Alfred E Newmans and what the effect will be.

And I hadn't heard about the CERN experiment, and when I googled it, what I got is what you point out - mostly reaction by the deniers. Because the people who actually did the experiment didn't want to speculate on the implications.

Or, you could have read these posts of mine, just up a couple above this one, instead of going off on these weird attacks you do on me for no reason:

andyt wrote:

Finally found some sensible commentary:

Quote:

It is a pity that some commentators were not consistent in their approach to the two findings of this experiment. Nucleation is low so other factors might amplify the effect. There is a Cosmic Ray effect that forms condensation nuclei, but they are too small to act as the seeds of clouds. But instead of saying that the chamber is not the atmosphere and the experiment not the whole story or the last word on this demonstrated effect, they argue that the nuclei are too small and that is the end of it. To my mind this is a clear example of bias and scientific double standards. Neither experiment here is the final word.

This experiment isn't something either side can hang their hat on as case proven.

andyt wrote:

To me this just shows how little we know. I think we should be doing our best to reduce CO2 output, but in a manner that doesn't do us too much harm either. And either way, looking at adapting to a warming planet seems like a prudent thing to do.

You've expressed doubts about AGW effects yourself, yet you come down on me for being a denier, even tho our positions sound very similar. This is the kind of thing why I ask if you've been drinking again.

[Canadian_Mind]

andyt wrote:

To me this just shows how little we know. I think we should be doing our best to reduce CO2 output, but in a manner that doesn't do us too much harm either. And either way, looking at adapting to a warming planet seems like a prudent thing to do.

I've been arguing this point for about 5 years now. Glad we have some more common ground Andy!

[Psudo]

andyt wrote:

I believe that humans putting CO2 into the atmosphere must be having some effect.

Even 90% of the skeptics believe that. Also, "adapting to a warming planet" is a skeptic's proposal, as opposed to adapting the planet to end warming through CO2 reductions. Are you a fence-sitter?

[andyt]

Yes. I say do both, reduce CO2 and take steps to adapt to a warmer planet. Don't see how the latter is a skeptics proposal, except in the sense of skeptcism that we as a global community can get our act together enough to reduce GHG outputs in the amounts required. That would take a huge life-style adjustment, and everybody will wait for somebody else to go first.