Tuesday, February 13, 2007

'Disdain for the sun'

I'm still not ready to discard the notion that 6.5 billion people belching, farting and tooling around in planes, trains and automobiles have at least some effect on the world's climate. At the same time though, I'm not ready to listen to Al Gore's doomsday scenarios.

One reason for that is articles like this one, which when taken with so many others like it expose the Global Warming/Climate Change movement for what it is: a money-making industry that deals harshly with anyone or anything that threatens their cash flow.
When politicians and journalists declare that the science of global warming is settled, they show a regrettable ignorance about how science works. We were treated to another dose of it recently when the experts of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change issued the Summary for Policymakers that puts the political spin on an unfinished scientific dossier on climate change due for publication in a few months’ time. They declared that most of the rise in temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to man-made greenhouse gases.

The small print explains “very likely” as meaning that the experts who made the judgment felt 90% sure about it. Older readers may recall a press conference at Harwell in 1958 when Sir John Cockcroft, Britain’s top nuclear physicist, said he was 90% certain that his lads had achieved controlled nuclear fusion. It turned out that he was wrong. More positively, a 10% uncertainty in any theory is a wide open breach for any latterday Galileo or Einstein to storm through with a better idea. That is how science really works.

[ ... ]

Disdain for the sun goes with a failure by the self-appointed greenhouse experts to keep up with inconvenient discoveries about how the solar variations control the climate. The sun’s brightness may change too little to account for the big swings in the climate. But more than 10 years have passed since Henrik Svensmark in Copenhagen first pointed out a much more powerful mechanism.

He saw from compilations of weather satellite data that cloudiness varies according to how many atomic particles are coming in from exploded stars. More cosmic rays, more clouds. The sun’s magnetic field bats away many of the cosmic rays, and its intensification during the 20th century meant fewer cosmic rays, fewer clouds, and a warmer world. On the other hand the Little Ice Age was chilly because the lazy sun let in more cosmic rays, leaving the world cloudier and gloomier.
Read it all.

1 comment:

British National Party member said...

Oh, mars is getting warmer too.

If they wanted to reduce Carbon so bad they could always do this,

http://bnpandme.blogspot.com/2007/02/non-water-melon-green-on-outside-red-on.html

But that would bean the growth of the west wouldn't need to be retarded, so i cant see it happening.