Slashdot Mirror


Cosmic Rays and Global Warming

Overly Critical Guy writes "The former editor of New Scientist has written an article in the TimesOnline suggesting that cosmic rays may affect global climate. The author criticizes the UN's recent global warming report, noting several underreported trends it doesn't account for, such as increasing sea-ice in the Southern Ocean. He describes an experiment by Henrik Svensmark showing a relation between atmospheric cloudiness and atomic particles coming in from exploded stars. In the basement of the Danish National Space Center in 2005, Svensmark's team showed that electrons from cosmic rays caused cloud condensation. Svensmark's scenario apparently predicts several unexplained temperature trends from the warmer trend of the 20th century to the temporary drop in the 1970s, attributed to changes in the sun's magnetic field affecting the amount of cosmic rays entering the atmosphere."

4 of 548 comments (clear)

  1. USE=brain by Schraegstrichpunkt · · Score: 5, Informative

    Before you people start screaming, "what do they expect us to do about cosmic rays??//?/?" Think. This isn't about "debunking" global warming, nor is it about fearmongering about it. It's about building more accurate climate models.

    Move along.

  2. Galileo Galilei by Anne+Honime · · Score: 5, Informative

    Just to nitpick, but Galileo Galilei wasn't the first nor the only one to describe heliocentrism - Nicolas Copernic was the forethinker of that system, and Galileo Galilei main discoveries (Saturn's rings, Jupiter's satellites, physics of the pendulum etc.) weren't in the line at his trial. Actually, most of the learned scholars of the time knew for a fact that heliocentrism gave far more accurate mathematicals results to build sailing tables.

    Galileo Galilei faced troubles because he wrote that helliocentrism was the physical TRUTH. He would have escaped any trial (and was offered a plea bargain as a matter of fact) had he accepted to write that heliocentrism was a mere hypothesis. But he refused and the rest is history. As to know why he was so stubborn, we now know there was a mix of self-pride, and insurance he received from high profile individuals among the Catholic Church that the Pope was considering adopting a progressive doctrine. That turned out to be deceptive. Basically, he was caught in the middle of a political fight, and sided with the wrong persons.

  3. Cyclic weather vs. Global warming by Per+Abrahamsen · · Score: 5, Informative

    The "we are headed towards an ice age" meme was due to the belief in cyclic weather, basically that the global temperature could be predicted by a Fourier series. You can always fit any measured data to a Fourier series, but here at least some of the coefficients had astronomical explanations.

    Global warming was also a concern 30 years ago, as the mechanisms were well known. There were actually people warning about global warming a 100 years ago. However, only recently computers have become fast enough, and measurements accurate enough, that you can actually quantify the risk.

    Interestingly enough, cyclic weather has until recently[1] been used to dismiss global warming, claiming that it was not man made but predicted by the coefficients in the Fourier series. Which does apparently conflict with the series predicting an ice age, but not really, as the series consist of overlapping cycles, and you can be on the way up on one of the short cycles, and on the way down one of the longer.

    [1] You still see references to it by laypeople on the net, but it is no longer used that way by scientists.

  4. Re:cult of global warming by tscoreninja · · Score: 5, Informative

    he MUST be in the pocket of big business. Actually he probably wants to promote the book he is going to publish. So he definitely is in it for the money. Also, he selectively quotes results, while omitting contrary findings. Just a few aspects from the artikel:

    While sea-ice has diminished in the Arctic since 1978, it has grown by 8% in the Southern Ocean.... Why is east Antarctica getting colder?" It makes no sense at all if carbon dioxide is driving global warming. Other sources present a completely different picture :

    'The greatest temperature rise on Earth over the past five decades has been found on the Antarctic peninsula, which stretches north from the continent towards South America,' said Dr John Turner. 'Temperatures have risen 5C on the peninsula.' That figure is 10 times the average global temperature rise for the same period. In addition, researchers reported last October that in just over a month, an entire Antarctic ice shelf, bigger than Gloucestershire, had disintegrated and disappeared, with its loss directly linked to man-made global warming. Also, why does not he mention the fact that the original Svensmark paper has been disproofed? His claim

    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. is simply wrong: See Damen and Laut, 2004, available at http://www.realclimate.org/damon&laut_2004.pdf

    An update with the correct data (from the International Satellite Cloud Climatology Program,ISCCP) shows that the development of total global cloud cover since 1992 has been in clear contradiction to the hypothesis proposed by the authors So decide for yourself how unbiased the author is.