Posted on 11/12/2007 10:07:52 PM PST by Robert A Cook PE
But CO2 levels are conspicuous in their FAILURE to track past climate changes.
But CO2 changes do track well with the environmentalists/socialists/neo-communists/Euro-naitons is THEIR efforts to control the world's energy supplies.
Is this the next “Global Warming” or just another cause of it?
I can see it now...a NYT article “Cosmic Rays caused by Big Oil” Women and minorities hurt the most! It’s time for “universal cosmic ray control!” We’ll have “cosmic credits” By mid-afternoon Gore will proclaim “The science is settled”. Nancy Pelosi will say “I’m sure if we just go talk to these cosmic rays, they’d be reasonable”. Hillary, clutching the FBI file on cosmic rays will be on the phone trying to contact Cosmic dishwashers in NYC. John Edwards wonders how these cosmic rays could affect his hair.
The combination of (Solar Wind/solar Magnetic Shielding) + (Earth’s Magnetic Field Changes) + (Background Cosmic Ray levels) -> (Decreased Cloud Cover) -> (Increased Earth’s Temperature) is very solid, and IS the cause of the (current) 1/2 degree change in temperature.
These changes track over the past few centuries, and track (through proxies like Argon and O2 isotope changes) through previous glacial and warm periods.
CO2 and methane levels do NOT track as precursors to temp changes, but instead FOLLOW temperature changes. They therefore, cannot be the cause of the temperature change. Solar flux (Cosmic ray interactions) DOES track as a precursor to temp changes.
CO2 is NOT responsible for the net changes in temperature we see today, but IS responsible for the greater plant growth and a large amount of today’s increased agriculture and woodlands productivity.
Ya, right. Tell that to our idiot governor (Crist), several other idiot governors and the rest of them with their hands out waiting to cash in on the sheeple that believe this.
Uh no...You must understand, GW is only caused by man. Anything else, any other ideas, don't really fit.
www.Co2science.org has 15-20 other studies on the positive links between cosmic ray levels and climate - most establishing the relationship between cosmic ray flux density and low level and intermediate level cloud cover.
Try this list of studies to start:
http://www.co2science.org/scripts/CO2ScienceB2C/subject/e/extraterrestrial.jsp
Neither!
It's the SOLE cause of it..!
Unfortunately, Al Gore cannot make money off of cosmic rays as yet.
But thank you for your interest. In the event that Mr. Gore can make money off of cosmic rays in the future, he’ll contact you.
/recording from Al Gore’s Office of Consumer Response Responses 8<)
~~ AGW™ ping~~
Louder, please. I think some Liberals in the back of the room didn't hear that part.......
Bush did it!
Huh??
Are you saying that AlGore is wrong?
But....I thought the debate was over.
The truth shall be suppressed by the left and its minions in the media.
Changes in CO2 have not - even at the very high levels of CO2 in the past - changed temperatures.
Today - as CO2 levels have steadily increased, temps have gone up (twice) , gone down (twice), been steady. No one, at any time in any research, has shown that CO2 changes temperatures at any level (high altitude, mid-troposphere, lower atmospheric, or on the ground.)
Warming: Decreased clouds allow more IR, visible, and UV rays to penetrate lower, get absorbed, and be re-reflected back by the (increased) water vapor still present.
Of course parameterization for cloud cover is included in GCMs!
But my question was about the energy balance, if the radiative forcing (IPCC definition) is 2 W/m2, how is that excess energy expressed, if not as atmospheric heat (sensible/latent)?
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.