HOME
Beware Global Warming propaganda of the fourth kind! by Piers Corbyn
Combating Cosmic-Ray bashing is one thing but WE have to get it right!
A Note from Piers Corbyn, astrophysicist - WWW.WeatherAction.Com
In his interesting article 'Attempt To Discredit Cosmic Ray-Climate Link Using Computer Model' Doug Hoffman (http://climaterealists.com/?id=3409 & Attempt To Discredit Cosmic Ray-Climate Link Using Computer Model) correctly criticizes the article Appearing in Science under the title, “Study Challenges Cosmic Ray–Climate Link,” as nothing more than a computer program study rather than proper Physics.
However we must understand that the reason why the Global Warmers put so much effort into both advertising and attacking the Cosmic Ray theory is because, despite its honorable origins and the excellence of Svensmark & Calder, it CAN be easily refuted as a climate driver of any significance and with their twisted logic Global Warmers then claim "Oh Climate Change isn't Cosmic Rays therefore its CO2!".
We cannot defend a theory which doesn't work in order to show CO2 theory doesn't work! CO2 theory does not work - period.
1. There is no evidence that Cosmic Rays as such are drivers of any significance - or indeed at all - of world temperature or Climate Change. If they were there would have to be an 11year signal in world temperatures (since it is the magnitude of the sun's magnetic field which blocks out cosmic rays) but there is not. The largest signal is the 22year magnetic cycle of the sun, so there is observational evidence AGAINST the Cosmic ray driver theory and FOR solar charged particles* themselves having a prime effect. (*which are vastly more numerous and also carry in total 300 times more energy flux despite the much higher individual energy of the relatively much much rarer Cosmic rays)
2. The failure of the Cosmic ray theory does not in any way negate the excellent findings by Svensmark et al (and work years ago on cloud chanber physics) that charged particles have an important role in cloud physics and therefore weather and climate. It is just that the charged particles of importance are not Cosmic rays.
3. Cosmic rays are of course an (inverted C14) proxy for general solar magnetic activity and so of course (inverted) cosmic Rays, sunspots, solar brightness and geomagnetic activity all move roughly together in an 11 year cycle. However world temperatures do NOT move in an 11 year cycle (even if some limited types of clouds appear do), they primarily follow the 22 year solar magnetic cycle which modulates how SOLAR charged particles affect the Earth.
Of course on time scales of longer than 22 years there IS a fair correlation between all the parameters listed and world temperatures and climatic effects - as well known on measured time scales of typically centuries. However that does not prove that any of them are a driving force any more than the levels of mercury in thermometers are agents of atmospheric warming.
The observed 22 year temperature signal shows that Cosmic rays, and solar irradiance cannot be key drivers but that solar charged particles reaching earth and acting through magnetic links can be.
The Sun's magnetic field changes direction and warming affect every cycle so in terms of the 22 year cycle world temperature peaks occur at about two years after the ODD cycle maxima (egg 2002/03) and the temperature minima appear at about two years after the EVEN cycle maxima.
In summary.
Geomagnetic Activity (ie solar particles reaching earth's magnetic field) X 22yr Magnetic linkage => World Temps.
{NB There are also slower modulators (eg lunar effects)}.
4. The failure of the Cosmic ray theory (or any single solar cycle theory) does not mean there is any truth in the CO2 theory which also is refuted by observations. Various CO2 centred 'climate scientists', 'science journalist', 'climate experts', politicians and the BBC promote the stupidification of science in their own self interests. Global warmers really like half reports of something or other to do with Cosmic rays or solar brightness or solar particles (without magnetic modulation) in order to have a 'straw man' to knock down. They want to create THE choice between two wrong theories hoping they can make the other one 'wronger' than theirs. That way they hope to avoid having to come up with evidence for their own theory, because they have none. EVIDENCE based science is what we stand for and all theories which fail the test must be discarded and their pioneers duly thanked.
I find it useful to think of 4 kinds of Global Warming propaganda as follows:
The more desperate the GWers become the further down the scale they descend.
The first three are in tatters so now we will hear more GW propaganda of the 4th kind.
GW1 = "CO2 causes Global warming"
GW2 = "CO2 causes Climate change" (somehow jumping over the warming link which is proven as broken) - Storms, Arctic, etc
GW3 = "CO2 direct effects" - so called ocean acidification
GW4 = Spurious pseudo-scientific twisted logic & political innuendo such as:
- "It's not a dog therefore its a cat" ("It's not solar brightness / Cosmic Rays therefore its CO2"");
- The CO2 effect is being 'stored up' (equivalent to waiting for time to run backwards since data shows that CO2 levels in the long run are driven by temperature).
- Al Gore gave up tobacco farming therefore skeptics are wrong.
Please see the latest world forecast from Piers Corbyn by clicking the following link http://www.weatheraction.com/displayarticle.asp?a=33&c=1
Last updated 15 May
2009
Related Articles
