Scottish Sceptic

We are now seeing an increasing number of newsmedia carrying the heliocentric view of climate as proposed by Svensmark (example). This currently leading the pack, but coming close behind is the continuing dissection of hurricane Irene and massive hype that preceded this storm.
Then the next story is one about using soot emissions as a “quick fix to climate“, then “Green technology accelerates warming“. The “Aliens may kill us because of warming“, and there is still “Al Gore’s rant about global warmers being racists“, with others like Global warming agenda to hit living standards‎.
In short, there isn’t one story speaking positively about cutting CO2, most are either ambiguous or highly critical and it’s really being treated as a bit of a jokey topic.
There’s a point at high tide where all the flotsam and jetsam brought in by the tide, gets dumped as the water starts going the other way. I think this is what we are seeing!

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1n2oq-XIxI&w=560&h=345]

Data covering 1 June to 29 August show that the average temperature was 11.8C, compared with an average of 12.8C last year. (Scotsman)
UK summer the coolest for 18 years Met Office says average temperature was 13.6C (Guardian)
ONE of our coldest summers ever has been followed by the coldest August in 25 years.
Following an “unspectacular summer” of the coldest June in nearly 40 years and the coldest July in 50 years, this month is now one of the coldest since records began in 1851.(Irish Independent)

I knew it was cold!

Henrik Svensmark: The Cloud Mystery (1 of 6 = ~1hr)

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKoUwttE0BA&w=420&h=345]

Short animation – the Cosmic Climate Connection

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2ImCO3XYXQ&w=420&h=345]

Continue reading →

It seemed paradoxical to me the first time I worked it out , but it is a truth that wet air is less dense than dry air. Yes, if you wet air, it gets less heavy.  For anyone that has fallen in a pool of water or got drenched in the rain, we are used to wet things being much heavier, but honestly

WET AIR IS LIGHTER! Continue reading →

Just some thoughts on Cosmic rays, CO2 and clouds.
Around half the heat of the sun transferred to the earth’s surface leaves as evaporation. That latent heat cannot be lost until that water is condensed in those fluffy things in the air – which is the primary transportation mechanism for around half the solar heat hitting the earth. Continue reading →

Just how much cosmic rays affect cloud formation has, however, remained elusive. A team at CERN, led by Jasper Kirkby, therefore decided to recreate both the solar cycle and the atmosphere in a lab. Their “cosmic rays” are generated by one of CERN’s particle accelerators. To simulate the atmosphere, they have built a special cloud chamber of their own, with the air manufactured from scratch, using liquid nitrogen and oxygen together with precise amounts of trace compounds, including sulphuric acid and ammonia.
…Atmospheric physics is, of course, notoriously complex. And it would be foolish to start reprogramming all the models on the basis of this single result. But it does suggest that a closer look is needed into what is going on in the real atmosphere. Clearly, there is life in the old cloud chamber yet. (Economist)

Comment
I’m starting to see a pattern: climate models need to change, … or in simple language: THEY ARE WRONG.
That seems to be the consensus that is developing. Present climate models are wrong, which means that the predictions of the models are wrong. Which means that all that money has been spent…. etc.

Understandably, then, sceptics are getting pretty excited by a paper published in Nature magazine this week in which scientists at CERN, the nuclear research laboratory near Geneva, have shown that radiation from space can affect the way clouds form in our atmosphere – and in turn – perhaps – affecting temperatures on the ground  (Mail)

Well I really can’t fault the article. Fair, proportionate, covering the details whilst giving the big picture. Obviously disappointing that the eco-zealots got in first – but it’s hardly the Mail’s fault they aren’t on the warmist list of propaganda outlets.
 
 

As everyone must know by now CERN have effectively confirmed the work by Henrik Svensmark and his hypothesis that there is a link between sunspots and climate with the implication that:

most of the global warming of the 20th Century can be explained by the reduction in cosmic rays due to livelier solar activity, resulting in less low cloud cover and warmer surface temperatures. (WUWT)

So, I was rather intrigued to see what the MSM said about the climate-sunspot link: not much! And they all clearly are following a very tight “message”:

Cloud formation study casts a shadow over certain climate models … The work suggests that one or more unidentified organic gases – produced either naturally or from human activities – has a significant influence on the Earth’s cloud cover. (Guardian)

The implication is clearly being repeated:

“Study does not prove cosmic rays drive climate change” (Reuters)

So is there any evidence to link sunspots and climate? Where is the last place one would imagine to look? The Biased Broadcasting Company?

The growth of British trees appears to follow a cosmic pattern, with trees growing faster when high levels of cosmic radiation arrive from space. (BBC)

How on earth did that bombshell slip past the BBC climate sensor?
Obviously the only news out so far is from those “pro-warmist” organisations (except some in physics) who have been pump primed with the “nothing to see here folks move along” message they hope will be taken up by what they must believe is a bunch of gullible morons in the rest of the press.
As someone else put it. The theory of CO2 induced positive feedbacks for their doomsday warming is totally without experimental basis. The theory for sunspot-climate link is now pretty much proven beyond reasonable doubt both from the CERN work showing the mechanism and by the empirical data showing that there is a correlation. This is like comparing apples with pears. Real science with voodoo eco-political claptrap.
There is no way on earth anyone can ever again ask: “well what else could have caused it?” The only valid question is how much of the (apparent) warming is due to CO2, how much due to sunspots, and how much due to the multitude of other influences on the climate which have been similarly denied by the nutters running science at the moment.