Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Solar Activity, Earth's Magnetic Field and Galactic Cosmic Rays Affect Climate
CO2Science.org ^ | 20 June 2007 | Dergachev, V.A., Dmitriev, P.B., Raspopov, O.M. and Jungner, H.

Posted on 11/12/2007 10:07:52 PM PST by Robert A Cook PE

References:

Dergachev, V.A., Dmitriev, P.B., Raspopov, O.M. and Jungner, H. 2006.

Cosmic ray flux variations, modulated by the solar and earth's magnetic fields, and climate changes. 1. Time interval from the present to 10-12 ka ago (the Holocene Epoch).

Geomagnetizm i Aeronomiya 46: 123-134.

What was done

The authors review what they deem to be the salient features of the interacting effects of variations in solar activity and earth's magnetic field on the flux of galactic cosmic rays, together with the likelihood of their potential impact on earth's climate, based on "direct and indirect data on variations in cosmic rays, solar activity, geomagnetic dipole moment, and climate from the present to 10-12 thousand years ago, [as] registered in different natural archives (tree rings, ice layers, etc.)."

What was learned

Dergachev et al. find that "galactic cosmic ray levels in the earth's atmosphere are inversely related to the strength of the helio- and geomagnetic fields," and they conclude that "cosmic ray flux variations are apparently the most effective natural factor of climate changes on a large time scale." More specifically, they note that "changes in cloud processes under the action of cosmic rays, which are of importance for abundance of condensation nuclei and for ice formation in cyclones, can act as a connecting link between solar variability and changes in weather and climate," and they cite numerous scientific studies that indicate that "cosmic rays are a substantial factor affecting weather and climate on time scales of hundreds to thousands of years."

What it means

Carbon dioxide may not be the all-important dominating factor climate alarmists make it out to be when discussing earth's climatic history. Within the context of the Holocene, for example, the only time CO2 moves in concert with air temperature is over the period of earth's recovery from the global chill of the Little Ice Age (the past century or so), and it only does so then quite imperfectly. The flux of galactic cosmic rays, on the other hand, appears to have influenced ups and downs in both temperature and precipitation over the entire 10-12 thousand years of the Holocene, making it the prime candidate for "prime determinant" of earth's climatic state.

Reviewed (by www.CO2Science.org) 20 June 2007


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: cosmicrays; globalwarming; magneticfields
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-49 last
To: Gondring
The CGM’s are only (poor) simulations of the earth’s real climates: and none work.

CO2 IS a vital part of the GHG total: water vapor accounts for 90% of the total GHG’s effect. Man-produced CO2, nitrogen oxides, and methane accounts for only 0.28% of the EFFECT of all GHG’s: that factor takes into account the relative values of water vapor, methane, and the other gasses.

The National Geo article explicitly says CO2 is the most important GHG - and it is NOT. Furthering their lie/exaggeration, they directly imply that man-induced CO2 is the direct cause of today’s 1/2 of one degree change. What’s the BS?

CGM’s are critical to the AGW’s extremists because they are the ONLY source of an extremist’s ability to alarm the public, build empires, and get trillions of dollars.

41 posted on 11/17/2007 4:07:51 PM PST by Robert A Cook PE (I can only donate monthly, but Hillary's ABBCNNBCBS continue to lie every day!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Gondring
And you realize that they absorb different wavelengths, right?

Actually they are well overlapped which when combined with the relative frequency of CO2 and H2O molecules is why CO2 is an even weaker GHG than at first glance.


42 posted on 11/17/2007 4:13:15 PM PST by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Robert A. Cook, PE
The National Geo article explicitly says CO2 is the most important GHG - and it is NOT.

I still don't see it...please paste the quote.

43 posted on 11/18/2007 10:30:57 AM PST by Gondring (I'll give up my right to die when hell freezes over my dead body!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Robert A. Cook, PE

Face facts...you can’t stop this mass movement.

Read up on Eric Hoffer’s book...Mass Movements. Going back over twenty-five years...the environmentalists have banded themselves under a umbrella, and with the aide of dimwit politicians and the media...they are basically challenging any truth that we can toss at them. We could have absolute evidence in hand that solar activity is the one and only trigger to global climate changes...and it wouldn’t matter.

This is why the mess before us...preparing to consume vast amounts of our personal and national wealth...leaves us in a stage of suffering and woes. We have American citizens who have no problem in taxing us...and giving the wealth collected to some third world country...in the interest of carbon credits. The only possible method of halting this mess...is to actually have a bigger mess at our front door...such a major meteor strike wiping out 300,000 people and creating an actual real “winter” for the entire earth. To think in this type of logic as a way of stopping the environmentalists...is absolutely madness, but we have virtually no way of stopping them....not even the truth.


44 posted on 11/18/2007 10:44:44 AM PST by pepsionice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Robert A. Cook, PE

So the stars (sun) do effect our destinies. Must start reading astrology section in the paper.


45 posted on 11/18/2007 10:45:04 AM PST by fella (The proper application of the truth far more important than the knowledge of it's existance."Ike")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gondring
A greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide traps solar heat in Earth’s atmosphere. The gas is known as the biggest contributor to global warming of the planet.

But man's actual TOTAL greenhouse gas impact (concentration times real effect) = 0.28% of all greenhouse gasses. Water is both the largest contributor by volume and by total impact: but the AGW alarmists don't want to mention that inconvenient fact.


46 posted on 11/19/2007 3:23:16 PM PST by Robert A Cook PE (I can only donate monthly, but Hillary's ABBCNNBCBS continue to lie every day!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Robert A. Cook, PE
Okay, so they didn't say what you claimed.

Please check out #38 again. I'm sure you understand the concept of a differential change versus absolute values.

47 posted on 11/19/2007 3:45:40 PM PST by Gondring (I'll give up my right to die when hell freezes over my dead body!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Gondring
?

A greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide traps solar heat in Earth’s atmosphere. The gas is known as the biggest contributor to global warming of the planet.

That phrase says exactly what I claimed: They are claiming CO2 (specifically implying man-released CO2) is the biggest greenhouse gas. CO2 is NEITHER the biggest GHG, nor is man-released CO2 the biggest GHG.

48 posted on 11/19/2007 3:56:22 PM PST by Robert A Cook PE (I can only donate monthly, but Hillary's ABBCNNBCBS continue to lie every day!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Robert A. Cook, PE
They are claiming CO2 (specifically implying man-released CO2) is the biggest greenhouse gas.

You're twisting their words and trying to claim that "Biggest Greenhouse Gas" = "Biggest Contributor to Global Warming," while I'm sure you realize they don't mean the same thing.

Obviously, "Global Temperature Increase" would be a better term than "Global Warming," so the differential is emphasized, but the definitions are accepted. Even though I disagree with the IPCC on whether or not indirect effects should be included in the term "Radiative Forcing," their definition is standard and it's silly to just argue the definition as if that means making a point about the real world. Define things as you want, but they didn't claim that CO2 has a greater greenhouse effect than water vapor.

49 posted on 11/19/2007 4:52:51 PM PST by Gondring (I'll give up my right to die when hell freezes over my dead body!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-49 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson