[Peace-discuss] Another "conspiracy theorist, " Global Warming variety.

[Chuck Minne]

Thanks for the link and its very interesting comments. I am completely unschooled in climate science (so at least on this subject we are on equal footing,) and I just read the article in Discover and thought it was interesting.
   
  I am not qualified to attack or defend Sevnsmark’s work. With that said, I would point out that he said, “It was only over a short period of time, because the data were covering just seven years or something like that. So it was almost nothing, but it was a nice correlation.” So I think he might agree with the criticism about a trend being lacking, but I am really in no position to even guess at that.
   
  The other point I would make, again with no personal qualification, is that the link also says, “Furthermore, the lack of trend in GCR does not falsify the mechanism proposed by Svensmark, i.e. that GCR act as a trigger for cloud condensation nuclei and are related to the amount of low clouds. As for this latter issue, the jury is still out.”
   
  You might consider sending your post to Discover as a letter to the editor and see if you can get a response. That would be very interesting. Others may do something similar and I will be on the watch for that. Thanks again for the link; I found the comments as interesting as the article.
   
  P.S Just between you and me, your comments about altimeters are so unrealistic that they are a joke. If you spent ten minutes in a cockpit you would know what I mean. However, I understand that you now attack me on reflex, shooting in all directions with the hope something will hit. My advice would be to stick with cosmic rays, I don't know squat about them. 
   
  All that being said, I do think the link above was really good. And I also think that you and I have subjected this list to enough crap, and that best way to end that if for me to unsubscribe, for I recognize my share of that responsibility. 


ouroboros rex <c-bee1 at itg.uiuc.edu> wrote:   Chuck Minne wrote:

>From: http://discovermagazine.com/2007/jul/the-discover-interview-henrik-svensmark
> 
> Sun's Shifts May Cause Global Warming 06.25.2007 
> His studies show that natural variations in the sun plays a major role in global warming. So are humans off the hook? And if so, why does he use compact fluorescent lightbulbs?
> 
> by Marion Long 
>
> Most leading climate experts don’t agree with Henrik Svensmark, the 49-year-old director of the Center for Sun-Climate Research at the Danish National Space Center in Copenhagen. In fact, he has taken a lot of blows for proposing that solar activity and cosmic rays are instrumental in determining the warming (and cooling) of Earth. His studies show that cosmic rays trigger cloud formation, suggesting that a high level of solar activity—which suppresses the flow of cosmic rays striking the atmosphere—could result in fewer clouds and a warmer planet. This, Svensmark contends, could account for most of the warming during the last century. Does this mean that carbon dioxide is less important than we’ve been led to believe? Yes, he says, but how much less is impossible to know because climate models are so limited.
> 
> There is probably no greater scientific heresy today than questioning the warming role of CO2, especially in the wake of the report issued by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). That report warned that nations must cut back on greenhouse gas emissions, and insisted that “unless drastic action is taken . . . millions of poor people will suffer from hunger, thirst, floods, and disease.” As astrophysicist ?Eugene Parker, the discoverer of solar wind, writes in the foreword to Svensmark’s new book, The Chilling Stars: A New Theory of Climate Change, “Global warming has become a political issue both in government and in the scientific community. 
> 
> The scientific lines have been drawn by ‘eminent’ scientists, and an important new idea is an unwelcome intruder. It upsets the established orthodoxy.”
>
Yes, folks whose ideas don't bear fruit when subjected to further study 
often say such things. The truth is, scientists check each others' work 
all the time, and if you can upset the other guys' apple cart with 
better work, you often get more famous in your field.

Here's his problem:

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=42

Of course, even so, I'm having to deal with woowoos on 
alt.global-warming that bring up cosmic rays constantly now.

_______________________________________________
Peace-discuss mailing list
Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss




  
   
  But judge for yourself, don't be afraid, Watch This or This
   
  

 
---------------------------------
It's here! Your new message!
Get new email alerts with the free Yahoo! Toolbar.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/private/peace-discuss/attachments/20070628/d4c4553b/attachment.htm