BBC Blog Network

User Profile

ScudLewis

Listed below are comments made by ScudLewis between Tuesday, 15th December 2009 and Thursday, 24th December 2009.

«Newer
Older»

Global temperature predictions for a new decade 5:22pm on 24 Dec 2009 Something to interest people:

Study shows CFCs, cosmic rays major culprits for global warming
http://insciences.org/article.php?article_id=8012

"My findings do not agree with the climate models that conventionally thought that greenhouse gases, mainly CO2, are the major culprits for the global warming seen in the late 20th century," Lu said. "Instead, the observed data show that CFCs conspiring with cosmic rays most likely caused both the Antarctic ozone hole and global warming. These findings are totally unexpected and striking, as I was focused on studying the mechanism for the formation of the ozone hole, rather than global warming."
In praise of scepticism 5:14pm on 24 Dec 2009 @Bob Ryan - CERN Cloud experiment is certainly an interesting research project.

May be worth also looking at the following in relation to cosmic rays:

Cosmic-ray-driven electron-induced reactions of halogenated molecules adsorbed on ice surfaces: Implications for atmospheric ozone depletion
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2009.12.002

OK sounds dull - but to quote from an article (link below):

"My findings do not agree with the climate models that conventionally thought that greenhouse gases, mainly CO2, are the major culprits for the global warming seen in the late 20th century," Lu said. "Instead, the observed data show that CFCs conspiring with cosmic rays most likely caused both the Antarctic ozone hole and global warming. These findings are totally unexpected and striking, as I was focused on studying the mechanism for the formation of the ozone hole, rather than global warming."

"In his latest paper, Lu further proves the cosmic-ray-driven ozone depletion theory by showing a large number of data from laboratory and satellite observations. One reviewer wrote: "These are very strong facts and it appears that they have largely been ignored in the past when modelling the Antarctic ozone loss."

Source: http://insciences.org/article.php?article_id=8012

Happy holidays!!
Global temperature predictions for a new decade 3:01pm on 23 Dec 2009 @Paul A Prosperous New Year to you and the blog readers too. Great post (again) - agreed it is going to be a fascinating few years. Although the immediate snow and cold is proving an excellent weather event to follow. Perhaps this cold spell is giving us a taste of things to come?
COP15: Breaking a deal 08:15am on 18 Dec 2009 Any chance of a piece about the Russian think tank claiming Met Office manipulated climate data?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1236513/Met-Office-manipulated-climate-change-figures-say-Russian-think-tank.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLHQL61YzKs

Also - the New Scientists reaction piece to the '100 reasons Climate Change is Natural' is worth a read:

New Scientist: 50 reasons why global warming isn't natural
http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/shortsharpscience/2009/12/50-reasons-why-global-warming.html

Interesting quote:

"3) Warmer periods of the Earth's history came around 800 years before rises in CO2 levels.

In the past 3 million years changing levels of sunshine triggered and ended the ice ages. Carbon dioxide was a feedback that increased warming, rather than the initial cause. In the more distant past, several warming episodes were directly triggered by CO2."

Am I correct in thinking they are saying warming periods are both triggered by the Sun and CO2, but if the Sun triggers a warming period - CO2 increases the warming?
In praise of scepticism 4:52pm on 17 Dec 2009 Please - some more about that infamous pop bottle CO2 experiment.
You can't ignore the criticisms posted on the previous blog.

2 words = Validity & Reliability
Wednesday 16 December 2009 - in more detail 07:38am on 17 Dec 2009 @EthicalMan really enjoy your contributions.

However, the CO2 bottles experiment was a bad idea. Yes it shows how CO2 raises temperature, but you are on thin ice (no pun) extrapolating the idea to say it is analogous to Man Made Climate Change (MMCC).

The experiment did not say how much CO2 there was in the other bottle (parts per million - PPM) in order to raise it by 4 degrees (certainly wasn't an increase of 100 PPM).

One can only guess the PPM in the CO2 bottle was some considerably higher concentrations / mix than the current 400 PPM. Why do I guess this - the relationship between CO2 and temp. is a non-linear one (am I wrong?) and most of the warming CO2 can 'do' is sub 300 PPM.

The experiment was OK but only creates more questions. It would have been good to discuss further the positive feedbacks of raising CO2, and not trying to convince people through re-running a very basic/simplified example.

Climate Change is a concern - please treat with care.
Could the sun cast a shadow on global temperature predictions? 07:33am on 17 Dec 2009 @Paul Another very interesting post - sadly not well promoted by the BBC.

To add to the info here:

CERN presentation by Jasper Kirkby on his team's work into Solar Cycles and influence on climate (CLOUD Project). This project looks like it is making the case that the Sun may be able to take more of the credit for warming, currently attributed to CO2. Also current Solar lull may have important implications.

http://indico.cern.ch/conferenceDisplay.py?confid=52576
http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1180849

See also:
http://seekingalpha.com/article/175641-climategate-revolt-of-the-physicists
Why micro wind turbines don't work 07:27am on 17 Dec 2009 @EthicalMan really enjoy your contributions.

However, the CO2 bottles experiment was a bad idea. Yes it shows how CO2 raises temperature, but you are on thin ice (no pun) extrapolating the idea to say it is analogous to Man Made Climate Change (MMCC).

The experiment did not say how much CO2 there was in the other bottle (parts per million - PPM) in order to raise it by 4 degrees (certainly wasn't an increase of 100 PPM).

One can only guess the PPM in the CO2 bottle was some considerably higher concentrations / mix than the current 400 PPM. Why do I guess this - the relationship between CO2 and temp. is a non-linear one (am I wrong?) and most of the warming CO2 can 'do' is sub 300 PPM.

The experiment was OK but only creates more questions. It would have been good to discuss further the positive feedbacks of raising CO2, and not trying to convince people through re-running a very basic/simplified example.

Climate Change is a concern - please treat with care.
COP15: Climate 'scepticism' and questions about sex 9:11pm on 15 Dec 2009 Perhaps Richard is forewarning us of what will be in the up and coming BBC 2 series:

The Climate Wars
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00djvq9/episodes/upcoming
1/3. Dr Iain Stewart traces the history of climate change from its very beginning
2/3. Iain interviews some of the key global warming sceptics, part of the 1990s counter-attack
3/3. Dr Iain Stewart looks at how scientists can predict what changes global warming will bring

Also: Newsnight @ 10:30 tries to convince Sceptics of the science behind Climate Change - worth a look at the level they go for - hope it's not the CO2 in a bottle example (yes it is good to show Greenhouse Effect but not related to parts per million / climate sensitivity).
COP15: Climate 'scepticism' and questions about sex 8:04pm on 15 Dec 2009 Popped in for an update on COP15 - was met with the above!!!!!

Err....OMG...and to lump Nick Griffen into the mix (Godwin's Law)..this piece has floored me.

Seems the debate about Copenhagen and how to deal with Climate Change is now in a parallel universe (at least in the MSM).

Climate scepticism is a wide and varied group - please don't create a feeling that this is a case of 'us & them'. That points to a politics of tyranny.

A lot of 'sceptics' agree that Man is damaging the environment and we want something done to resolve the problem. But, perhaps not what is on offer at Copenhagen.

If you want to know why the uber-sceptics are shouting louder now - it is that the system seems flawed and it has shown a weakness after years of asserting that the science of climate change cannot be questioned - see ClimateGate, dodgy data and inaccessible data.

Only the truth, clarity, transparency and honesty will get us somewhere right now.

To many this has the same symptoms as the MPs expenses, CDOs, credit bubbles, vote rigging, etc...

«Newer
Older»

^ Back to top

BBC MMVI

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites

BBC.co.uk

BBC Blog Network

Find and talk to the BBC's bloggers.

User Profile

ScudLewis