Share on Google Plus Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Share on LinkedIn Share on PInterest Share on Fark! Share on Reddit Share on StumbleUpon Tell A Friend

Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite View Favorites (# of views)   No comments
Sci Tech

Another One Bites The Dust

By   Follow Me on Twitter     Message Michael Greenwell     Permalink

Related Topic(s): ; ; , Add Tags Add to My Group(s)

View Ratings | Rate It

opednews.com

Author 6589
Become a Fan
  (2 fans)
- Advertisement -

Those that have sought to muddy the waters of climate change have shifted strategies over time.

Firstly we were told it wasn't happening at all, then the emphasis shifted. We are currently being told, amongst other things, that it isn't man-made, it is now either

- Advertisement -

A - A natural cycle

B - Because of the sun

C - Communists

D - Terrorists

- Advertisement -

Take your pick (I might have made two up there), just don't blame governments, companies or yourself, keep buying, keep driving, keep flying.

The BBC published the findings of a report that blows at least one of the denial theories away...

[it] concludes that changes in the Sun's output cannot be causing modern-day climate change.

It shows that for the last 20 years, the Sun's output has declined, yet temperatures on Earth have risen.

It also shows that modern temperatures are not determined by the Sun's effect on cosmic rays, as has been claimed.

Further...

Dr Lockwood initiated the study partially in response to the TV documentary The Great Global Warming Swindle, broadcast on Britain's Channel Four earlier this year, which featured the cosmic ray hypothesis.

- Advertisement -

"All the graphs they showed stopped in about 1980, and I knew why, because things diverged after that," he told the BBC News website.

"You can't just ignore bits of data that you don't like," he said.

Warming trend

The scientists' main approach on this new analysis was simple: to look at solar output and cosmic ray intensity over the last 30-40 years, and compare those trends with the graph for global average surface temperature, which has risen by about 0.4C over the period.

Graphs of cosmic ray activity and temperature

Temperatures have continued rising irrespective of cosmic ray flux

The Sun varies on a cycle of about 11 years between periods of high and low activity.

But that cycle comes on top of longer-term trends; and most of the 20th Century saw a slight but steady increase in solar output.

However, in about 1985, that trend appears to have reversed, with solar output declining.

Yet this period has seen temperatures rise as fast as - if not faster than - any time during the previous 100 years.

"This paper reinforces the fact that the warming in the last 20 to 40 years can't have been caused by solar activity," said Dr Piers Forster from Leeds University, a leading contributor to this year's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assessment of climate science.

When the 'Great Global Warming Swindle' documentary was broadcast it caused an uproar in the scientific community and even some of the people in the documentary claimed that their views were misrepresented.

It was quickly picked up by some in the conspiracy theory category, who seemed to believe it was proof that global warming was a scam designed to put us all under more stringent control. It was also picked up by others in the business community and taken as a sign that it was ok to carry on regardless.

Fortunately, many people showed it up for the scam it was but not before it had warped the public perception of the issue. It is also unlikely that as many people read the debunkings of the programme as actually watched it.

For non-scientists or keen amateurs (like me) it is not too difficult to find out who is funding various groups and therefore see where the interest lies. It is also not difficult to find out who is a genuine expert and who is not. This is why I believe those who say man-made climate change is a reality and not a myth.

Imagine for a moment you read a report by an engineer that, based on accumulated evidence, stated that a car had a serious defect that may cause death or injury. Imagine there was then a huge campaign in order to stop anything being done about it and deny the evidence.

No, wait, thats already happened hasn't it?

Ok, another example. Imagine you were a doctor and based on years of evidence you knew that smoking was detrimental to health. Imagine then that there was a huge amount of time, money and air time given to studies, using selective evidence, suggesting that smoking wasn't bad for you at all.

Oh. That already happened too.

We are in the same area with global warming (and GM food, but that is another article).

I urge you to read this

The Denial Industry

 

- Advertisement -

View Ratings | Rate It

Scotland's Michael Greenwell has worked, at various times, as a university tutor, a barman, a DJ ("not a very good one," he clarifies), an office lackey, supermarket worker, president of a small charity, a researcher, a librarian, a volunteer worker in Nepal during the civil war there, and "some other things that were too tedious to mention." Nowadays, he explains, "I am always in (more...)
 

Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon



Go To Commenting
/* The Petition Site */
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Follow Me on Twitter

Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Related Topic(s): ; ; , Add Tags
- Advertisement -

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

What have we got to gain?

The Misanthropic Principle

Interview with Edward Current

What Should the Title of Bush's Memoirs Be?

Great Missing the Point Moments in History - Two - Crop Circles

I love a planet with a happy atmosphere