Posted on 07/05/2019 6:56:56 AM PDT by MtnClimber
We must hunt down and destroy these cosmic rays ,LOL
“It’s the Sun, stupid.”
That is only part of the picture.
Earth’s core movement.
Earth’s Magnetosphere changes.
Sun’s weather
Sun’s 11 year polarity reversal
Polarity bands in the spiral Milky Way Galaxy
AND... Cosmic ray, a form of high-energy radiation, mainly originating outside the Solar System and even from distant galaxies.
By “century length” I mean processes that have time-constants in the order of centuries, like the current purported global warming.
I say purported because there is no conclusive evidence that any global warming is occurring at all or that current temperatures are anomalous.
Even if some sort of anomalous global warming is occurring, the climate sensitivity to CO2 may be negative. IOW more CO2 may lower temperature.
Cosmic rays can vary wildly, but any effects on climate are not well understood.
It has been shown in NUMEROUS places that CO2 increases LAG temperature increases. You should be able to find that info in any CO2 vs Temperature graphs that are long term. They get this info from ice core samples and it is CLEAR that is the case.
Additionally, CO2 in the atmosphere is about 0.04% of the total gas. Man made contribution is about 5% of that. So how are we going to significantly affect temperatures by SLIGHTLY changing the man made 5% of 0.04%?
The answer is easy. Liberals need $$ and they need to control the economies of capitalist countries. By raising energy prices through the roof, the RATS get big $$ and they put people on welfare where they can be easily controlled. Get your social number too low by posting conservative principals, and it affects your welfare payment.
It is that simple.
The following graph shows the last century +. You can easily see that ACTUAL TEMPERATURE READING show the 1930's were the hottest temperatures in the last 100+ years. Everyone knows that CO2 in the 1930's was lower than now. As ACTUAL TEMPERATURE readings decreased in the last couple of years, ADJUSTED temperatures have INCREASED. The graph clearly shows that the only tmeperatures increasing now are ADJUSTED TEMPERATURES. In other words, liberals believe we are seeing ACTUAL TEMPERATURES higher than the 1930's. That is a LIE. We are seeing ADJUSTED TEMPERATURES that are higher. As anyone with an IQ above dirt knows, it is getting COOLER now compared to the last couple of decades. And CO2 levels continue to increase with CO2 levels increasing due to the lag effect.
It's so easy to fool dumba$$es which is how the liberals operate. The average voter thinks they are talking MEASURED ACTUAL TEMPERATURES when they say the Earth is warming. The truth is the liars are discussing ADJUSTED TEMPERATURES. They won't say it, but the adjustments bring the readings consistent with CO2 level changes of their computer modes. If the data doesn't fit, change the DATA! That is FRAUD 101 taught in any RAT political course.
Next thing you know, they’ll be wanting to build a lead shield around the earth to block the radiation.
Anyone who took high school physics, and read about “cloud chambers” being used since early times to detect particles, would understand that if more particles made it into the upper atmosphere, then we would get more clouds.
I understand all that. I don’t think that we necessarily disagree, but I am far from as confident as you are. While historically - on millennial time scales - CO2 lags temperature increases, we are in a unique period when mankind is in fact introducing nearly as much CO2 as all natural processes combined. We are in uncharted waters.
Politicized science and demagogic driven hysteria are not useful, serious consideration and study should be given to the issue. In the current polarized climate that is not possible.
Um, this has been known to real physicist (me included) for literally over a decade. You can check my posting history to verify. I have been posting this since I’ve been here.
+++++
Nice post. I hope you will keep posting about that giant hoax called Global Warming. Oops, that should be Climate Change.
Sorry, I’m a bit out of date. That should have read Climate Catastrophe, at least for awhile.
The sun is not active right now. Few sunspots correlates to a weaker magnetosphere which allows a higher number of cosmic rays into the Earth’s SOI. When there are high number of sunspots, the Earth’s magnetosphere lights up (northern lights) and deflects away the worst of those solar rays.
Cosmic rays still make it through, but the heliosphere, the sun’s magnetosphere, extends way out past the orbits of the gas giants. When the sun isn’t active, that solar sheath is weaker, and more cosmic rays make it to the inner planets.
Couple a weak solar cycle with the solar system’s traversal through higher-cosmic-ray containing open space means we get bombarded and cloud cover increases. This causes cooling.
The nutjobs back in the 70s claiming we’re headed toward another ice age were more scientifically accurate than the global warming psychos we hear from now.
This is what caused it, not cosmic rays???
They pass a law and that takes care of it. (Just look at the effectiveness of all the old gun control laws). (And look at all the War on Poverty legislation). (And look at all ... oh, just forget it)
Ok greenhouse gases are 1-2% of the atmosphere. Let’s go with 2% & 95% of that is water vapor with another 1.38% being a gas other then water vapor. So (95 + 1.38 = 96.38) then (100 - 96.38 = 3.62), so 3.62% of that greenhouse gas is CO2 per annum. Humans contribute only 3.4% of the annual CO2 greenhouse gas submission. So what have we done to bring it back to frightening levels? It’s not at Cambrian (Trilobite Park) levels, is not even at Jurassic Park levels! It’s not even as warm as Roman times, medieval times & we’re still coming out of the “Little Ice Age” !
Heck technically we are still in a Ice Age - the Quaternary! “ Quaternary Period is typically defined by the cyclic growth and decay of continental ice sheets associated with Milankovitch cycles and the associated climate and environmental changes that occurred”. No geologist that I am aware of has said here’s the physical evidence we have left the Quaternary.
Cyclic growth and decay of continental ice sheets are the key words . They’ve decayed and the best way to place your bets is - THEY’RE COMING BACK! So its been said before “Winter is Coming!”
You analysis is sloppy and flawed. I would be cautious drawing too many conclusions from it. Human contribution to “greenhouse warming” cannot be dismissed out of hand, as you appear to be attempting to do. Nor should we become hysterical and panicky because of dubious trends based on doctored data.
I admit it was back of the envelope calculations drawing from some papers I have. Can you give me your calculations so I can see where I am wrong?
Also if we’re no longer in the Quaternary, can you tell my why you say that? Cite some geologic papers maybe?
There are some interesting comments at the end of the article.
No, I didn't do any calculations. I am not making any affirmative statements, you are.
Your work fails as back of the envelope approximations. There are unexplained, or even unacknowledged assumptions, unsound extrapolations and flim flam. One egregious example is "Humans contribute only 3.4% of the annual CO2 greenhouse gas". Nobody said they aren't. The statement sounds deceptive because most greenhouse gases are watervapor which has an average lifetime in the atmosphere of about a week. A CO2 molecule has an average lifetime of about 25 years. The CO2 molecule has about 1000 times the warming potential. That's first and most obvious thing. It is not worth my time deconstructing the whole thing. It's propaganda and psuedoscience. It doesn't advance an open minded and honest search for the truth.
“... The CO2 molecule has about 1000 times the warming potential …”
Some citations please.
methane is far more powerful greenhouse gases in terms of infrared absorption per molecule. So you’re telling me CO2 is worse? How?
And yes CO2 accumulates, roughly cycles through at 100 years. However whole feedback mechanism is very poorly understood. So likely any numerical value is wrong.
I would love to have you deconstruct it. Maybe I might learn something!
Ok, so you argument boils down to, “ You’re wrong but I am not going to bother refuting what you say”? Lol.
There is sixty times as much water vapor as carbon dioxide and water vapor has three times the heat capacity. It is also massively more available to affect climate. Raise the temperature and you readily get a lot more of it. CO2 not so much.
It is also worth noting that trapping heat and raising temperature are not the same thing. It gets a lot hotter in dryer areas because there is nowhere for the energy to go. The simplistic CO2 arguments being made by global warming advocates are compounded errors in support of a doomsday fantasy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.