Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Man made global warming DEBUNKED by CERN.


  • Please log in to reply
64 replies to this topic

#16 mav1234

mav1234

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,529 posts

Posted 29 August 2011 - 08:32 PM

http://www.nature.co...s.2011.504.html

#17 Jase

Jase

    Kuechold Fantasies

  • Administrators
  • 17,101 posts
  • LocationMatthews, NC

Posted 29 August 2011 - 08:32 PM

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.

#18 cookinwithgas

cookinwithgas

    Grey Poupon Elitest Trash

  • ALL-PRO
  • 23,325 posts

Posted 29 August 2011 - 08:34 PM

Rodeo may I suggest you use smaller words next time.

#19 King

King

    A Cell of Awareness

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,761 posts

Posted 29 August 2011 - 08:34 PM

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.

#20 mav1234

mav1234

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,529 posts

Posted 29 August 2011 - 08:35 PM

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.



#21 mav1234

mav1234

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,529 posts

Posted 29 August 2011 - 08:36 PM

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

#22 Jase

Jase

    Kuechold Fantasies

  • Administrators
  • 17,101 posts
  • LocationMatthews, NC

Posted 29 August 2011 - 08:40 PM

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.

#23 rodeo

rodeo

    Keelah se'lai

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,928 posts

Posted 29 August 2011 - 08:42 PM

The past tense is actually debank.

#24 King

King

    A Cell of Awareness

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,761 posts

Posted 29 August 2011 - 08:48 PM

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.

#25 mav1234

mav1234

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,529 posts

Posted 29 August 2011 - 08:51 PM

it really doesn't debunk anything at all for two reasons:
1) finding is too small to really be sure what it means
2) some amount of cosmic rays influence has already been built into some of the models.

#26 cookinwithgas

cookinwithgas

    Grey Poupon Elitest Trash

  • ALL-PRO
  • 23,325 posts

Posted 29 August 2011 - 09:22 PM

please stop quoting facts, we have an Al Gore to ridicule here!

#27 King

King

    A Cell of Awareness

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,761 posts

Posted 29 August 2011 - 09:28 PM

Yes, facts are clearly what are motivating the left in this debate. Not the fact that environmentalism is just a post-modern socialism and it comes as a huge blow to industry.

But hey, keep saying "it's been proven, there's an overwhelming consensus" for another 10 years. You're bound to annoy the rest of the world enough to make them concede eventually.

#28 o_O

o_O

    Cam Newton

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 197 posts

Posted 30 August 2011 - 12:29 AM

Yep...the concept of man-made global warming is a total farce. Yes, Earth is experiencing global warming, but it is due to activity from the sun. All of the planets in our solar system have been "charging up" over the past 40 years or so. They are becoming brighter, hotter and more magnetically significant.

Neptune has become 40% brighter since '82; Pluto has had an atmospheric preassure increase of 300% since '89, wth a 700% increase in earthquakes since '73; Saturn's Plasma Torus has experienced an increase of 1000%, while also getting brighter and hotter; Uranus has been growing clouds for the first time ever, and has been turning blue since '04; Venus' atmosphere has been converting to oxygen based, while sulfer has been decreasing dramatically, especially so between '78 and '83; Mars is growing clouds as well and has endured an unexpected 200% increase in the density of its atmosphere; Jupiter has become hotter by 18 degrees fahrenheit, experiencing massive "Red Storms," while "heavy metals" in its atmosphere has been decreasing, with a stunning 10% between '79 and '95; the surface level of Jupiter's moon, Io, has become over 200% hotter than it was 30 years ago. I could go on...

Major changes are taking place in our solar system, in which all of the planets are experiencing global warming/climate change. We are not the only ones, and it sure as hell isnt due to man-made co2.


Pure speculation, much like everything else you talk about. It is impossible to verify this comment. o_O

#29 Mr. Scot

Mr. Scot

    Football Historian

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 39,908 posts
  • LocationSC

Posted 30 August 2011 - 02:06 AM

Pure speculation, much like everything else you talk about. It is impossible to verify this comment. o_O

It's actually easily verifiable. Just visit the bathroom in any Taco Bell.

#30 cookinwithgas

cookinwithgas

    Grey Poupon Elitest Trash

  • ALL-PRO
  • 23,325 posts

Posted 30 August 2011 - 06:20 AM

Myanus has started growing a polyp for the first time ever, and venom has verified this too.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com