Posted on 10/13/2006 4:43:44 PM PDT by neverdem
A new study provides experimental evidence that cosmic rays may be a major factor in causing the Earth’s climate to change.
Given the stakes in the current debate over global warming, the research may very well turn out to be one of the most important climate experiments of our time – if only the media would report the story.
Ten years ago, Danish researchers Henrik Svensmark and Eigil Friis-Christensen first hypothesized that cosmic rays from space influence the Earth’s climate by effecting cloud formation in the lower atmosphere. Their hypothesis was based on a strong correlation between levels of cosmic radiation and cloud cover – that is, the greater the cosmic radiation, the greater the cloud cover. Clouds cool the Earth’s climate by reflecting about 20 percent of incoming solar radiation back into space.
The hypothesis was potentially significant because during the 20th century, the influx of cosmic rays was reduced by a doubling of the sun’s magnetic field which shields the Earth from cosmic rays. According to the hypothesis, then, less cosmic radiation would mean less cloud formation and, ultimately, warmer temperatures – precisely what was observed during the 20th century.
If correct, the Svensmark hypothesis poses a serious challenge to the current global warming alarmism that attributes the 20th century’s warmer temperatures to manmade emissions of greenhouse gases.
Just last week, Svensmark and other researchers from the Centre for Sun-Climate Research at the Danish National Space Centre published a paper in the Proceedings of the Royal Society A – the mathematical, physical sciences and engineering journal of the venerable Royal Society of London – announcing that they had experimentally verified the physical mechanism by which cosmic rays affect cloud cover.
In the experiment, cosmic radiation was passed through a large reaction chamber containing a mixture of lower atmospheric...
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
That's all true, in fact the snowfall in Buffalo was caused by a slug of warm pacific air that went all the way up to the north pole, so there was warmth involved as well. But the question remains, what does this have to do with CO2 and mankind? The answer: not much. The same anomalous jet stream that caused the snow in Buffalo has come and gone throughout history. For example, the 30's and early 40's had a lot of anomalies like this.
That doesn't stop global warming proponents from pointing to one hot day or one bad hurricane as proof of global warming.
The early snow fall is more likely to be a sign of CLIMATE CHANGE than the opposite.
Tell me, how convenient is it to have a belief system where the opposite of what you expect is somehow proof of what you expect? I really need to know so I can understand Democrats, and you seem well-equipped to help me from your comments here.
Thanks for the link.
I live east of Buffalo. We got 2' of snow on October 4 back in the mid-80's.
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.