tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post1131026344115571575..comments2024-03-19T03:14:04.172-04:00Comments on Rabett Run: Eli can retire: Part III - Svensmark circles the drainEliRabetthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07957002964638398767noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-70292702881706636052010-12-11T16:41:32.891-05:002010-12-11T16:41:32.891-05:00Measurements of global surface temperatures show a...Measurements of global surface temperatures show a 0.7 deg C rise since 1900, which is not uniform. The IPCC has assessed all the causes of this rise and state that 1.6 w/m2 of radiative forcing is due to man. The only natural contribution to this rise is from a very slight increase in brightness of the sun (TSI), which the IPCC calculate as adding a negligable 0.12 w/m2 of radiative forcing. (See fig SPM.2 “Radiative Forcing Components" from the IPCC's 4th AR for a breakdown<br />http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/spmsspm-human-and.html )<br /><br />Numerous papers show clear associations of past climate with historical records of cosmic ray intensity (Be-10 & C-14). Providing strong evidence for solar-climate variability, but as yet, there is no established mechanism to explain such variability. So cannot be considered by the ICPP, or included in GCM's. Therefore the final paragraph of your article (above) seems generally correct.<br /><br />Nevertheless, I'm interested in what else needs to go into the 'Natural' component of fig. SPM.2. The 0.12w/m2 of TSI appears insufficiant to explain the solar-climate variability on its own. The question of whether - and to what extent - the climate is influenced by solar variability remains central to our understanding of anthropogenic climate changeAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-70426645322120495362010-07-06T19:00:53.279-04:002010-07-06T19:00:53.279-04:00Probably the WG I IPCC AR4
Contribution of Worki...Probably the WG I IPCC AR4 <br /><br />Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2007<br /><br />Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Averyt, M. Tignor and H.L. Miller (eds.)<br /><br />OTOH, it could be some tripe from Laurence Solomon in the Canadian National Journal:) Naw.EliRabetthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07957002964638398767noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-71464784715109242010-07-06T10:35:52.256-04:002010-07-06T10:35:52.256-04:00Anyone know what "Solomon et al (2007)" ...Anyone know what "Solomon et al (2007)" refers to? It seems to be missing from the the EPA's cites and I haven't been able to identify it.ChrisDnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-56863617525105122812010-04-03T19:36:55.999-04:002010-04-03T19:36:55.999-04:00Worth posting here - I also am not all over the we...Worth posting here - I also am not all over the web, and appreciate seeing it here. Thank you Eli.FancyRatnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-88867059238413054582010-04-02T09:16:37.660-04:002010-04-02T09:16:37.660-04:00The cosmic-ray paleoclimatological hypothesis of S...The cosmic-ray paleoclimatological hypothesis of Shaviv used by Svensmark in "Chilling Stars" have also been tested against new observational data on the Milky Way structure.<br />And the result: <a href="http://iopscience.iop.org/1538-4357/705/2/L101?ejredirect=migration" rel="nofollow">Fail</a>Anders Martinssonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17611686913637615704noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-13226218690010725892010-04-02T00:01:39.922-04:002010-04-02T00:01:39.922-04:00Aw, shucks, thanks Ray! (I do mean to read your c...Aw, shucks, thanks Ray! (I do mean to read your climate book at some point...)<br /><br />-AnonyMouseAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-1754397991731102592010-04-01T23:36:22.185-04:002010-04-01T23:36:22.185-04:00One of the most interesting things shown by these ...One of the most interesting things shown by these responses is that there are people working with or for the EPA who have a very comprehensive and deep understanding of climate. These responses are not brushoffs. They are very well-reasoned and to the point. Halelujah that the EPA is free to be in the science (reality) based community again!<br /><br />--raypierreAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-70096877647215905752010-04-01T18:50:01.410-04:002010-04-01T18:50:01.410-04:00"... make the association between galactic co..."... make the association between galactic cosmic ray-induced changes in aerosol and cloud formation controversial."<br /><br />Huh? There is still a controversy?David B. Bensonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02917182411282836875noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-78458239274851338062010-04-01T14:43:02.214-04:002010-04-01T14:43:02.214-04:00There is another twist to the Svensmark & Frii...There is another twist to the Svensmark & Friis-Christensen (1997), it seems that even the original apparent correlation isn't:<br /><a href="http://agwobserver.wordpress.com/2010/02/15/revisiting-svensmark-friis-christensen-1997/" rel="nofollow">http://agwobserver.wordpress.com/2010/02/15/revisiting-svensmark-friis-christensen-1997/</a><br /><br />Also, here are some more papers that show that cosmic rays are only a very minor player in climate:<br /><br /><a href="http://agwobserver.wordpress.com/2009/08/31/papers-on-the-non-significant-role-of-cosmic-rays-in-climate/" rel="nofollow">http://agwobserver.wordpress.com/2009/08/31/papers-on-the-non-significant-role-of-cosmic-rays-in-climate/</a>Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05138700258427516079noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-39340780244639886462010-04-01T13:59:43.831-04:002010-04-01T13:59:43.831-04:00This would have completely passed by me if I hadn&...This would have completely passed by me if I hadn't read it here. Thanks, it opened a completely new avenue of dis/information (and rebuttal) for me. I then took the chance of looking up some companies I know to see what they said compared to what they normally say in my presence. Really interesting. Thanks again.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com