Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Floppin

Man made global warming DEBUNKED by CERN.

65 posts in this topic

I get free access to Nature with my N.C. State library account.

Send me a PM with your email if anyone wants the full article.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I do appreciate the annual "this is the scandal that disproves global warming" because it gets right wingers to actually read about science briefly... like climategate and all the rest, this has already been debunked.

Galactic cosmic rays influencing cloud nucleation is already accepted science and has been accounted for in the global warming model, long before this study. It has also been noted that periods of increased galactic cosmic ray activity do not correspond to climate. Many of the warmest periods on the Earth are during markedly low activity levels for cosmic rays.

In fact the publisher of this study said flat out that the study does not indicate a link between increased cosmic ray activity and climate.

Does any of this matter? Nope. Because the same thing that always happens will happen again. This isn't a case of CERN being funded by oil or whatever the fug you guys sarcastically said. It's a case of some yahoos seeing that a study said "cosmic rays... clouds... earth..." and going "OMFG COSMIC RAYS DO GLOBAL WARMING WHATEVER THAT IS, THIS PROVES IT"

Step 1: People misunderstand some science.

Step 2: They're shown how they are incorrect.

Step 3: They ignore that part.

Step 4: Continue to cite their incorrect understanding of the science as proof of their incorrect belief.

Here is a source that goes way more in depth than I can, but I know you won't read it.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

in before the "But Global Climate Change is JUST A THEORY so we should compare it to the "God is pissed at us!" theory" or else it isn't scientific

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I do appreciate the annual "this is the scandal that disproves global warming" because it gets right wingers to actually read about science briefly... like climategate and all the rest, this has already been debunked.

Galactic cosmic rays influencing cloud nucleation is already accepted science and has been accounted for in the global warming model, long before this study. It has also been noted that periods of increased galactic cosmic ray activity do not correspond to climate. Many of the warmest periods on the Earth are during markedly low activity levels for cosmic rays.

In fact the publisher of this study said flat out that the study does not indicate a link between increased cosmic ray activity and climate.

Does any of this matter? Nope. Because the same thing that always happens will happen again. This isn't a case of CERN being funded by oil or whatever the fug you guys sarcastically said. It's a case of some yahoos seeing that a study said "cosmic rays... clouds... earth..." and going "OMFG COSMIC RAYS DO GLOBAL WARMING WHATEVER THAT IS, THIS PROVES IT"

Step 1: People misunderstand some science.

Step 2: They're shown how they are incorrect.

Step 3: They ignore that part.

Step 4: Continue to cite their incorrect understanding of the science as proof of their incorrect belief.

Here is a source that goes way more in depth than I can, but I know you won't read it.

unbiased rebuttal to an unbiased article.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rodeo may I suggest you use smaller words next time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing biased about this source.

And he makes it so convenient for me to purchase his book pandering to the green agenda on anthropogenic global warming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

a highlight:

...Kirkby adds, those particles are far too small to serve as seeds for clouds. "At the moment, it actually says nothing about a possible cosmic-ray effect on clouds and climate, but it's a very important first step," he says.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if anyone is actually interested in the nature article itself let me know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this finding boils down to, from what I can tell, that cosmic rays may have more influence on climate than once thought, but it also might not, more study needed.

hate the word debunked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The past tense is actually debank.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this finding boils down to, from what I can tell, that cosmic rays may have more influence on climate than once thought, but it also might not, more study needed.

hate the word debunked.

There's no may. The results are pretty positive that there is some influence in the troposphere, which is a huge blow to the "global warming is man-made" crowd. The further tests they want to conduct are purely to determine the magnitude of that effect.

No, the CERN article doesn't debunk anything. But it does come as an embarrassment to pretty much any climatologist or greenie that's been riding the "sunspots are irrelevant" bandwagon for the last several years.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites