Page 69 of 187 FirstFirst ... 1959676869707179119169 ... LastLast
Results 681 to 690 of 1866

Thread: Svensmark Closes the Loop -- The Missing Link Between GCR's, Clouds and Climate

  1. #681
    Sage
    Tim the plumber's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Sheffield
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:29 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    13,282

    Re: Svensmark Closes the Loop -- The Missing Link Between GCR's, Clouds and Climate

    Quote Originally Posted by Visbek View Post
    I'm stating that the CLOUD lab at CERN has been operating for years, performing a variety of experiments. A handful of papers from CLOUD studies lend some support to the CR theory; most do not. The study I linked is one of the most extensive surveys of 10 years of data, and its conclusion is that CR variability has a negligible effect on the climate overall.



    Please, spare us the conspiracy theory nonsense. We could just as easily say that the researchers who are funded by fossil fuel companies and conservative think tanks (e.g. Shaviv <--> Heartland) are equally compromised.



    The evidence is in the linked article, which apparently you didn't read. Impressive.
    You could but you would of course be lying.

    They are not funded by anybody but them selves.

  2. #682
    Sage
    Tim the plumber's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Sheffield
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:29 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    13,282

    Re: Svensmark Closes the Loop -- The Missing Link Between GCR's, Clouds and Climate

    Quote Originally Posted by longview View Post
    There seems to be quite a bit of dependency on the roll that clouds play in Earth's energy balance.
    The CERES satellite was launched to measure some of these things directly.
    https://ceres.larc.nasa.gov/document...TOA_Update.pdf
    The Global Mean TOA Flux (Wm-2) Ed2.8
    March 2000 June 2015
    All sky NET 0.60 Wm-2
    Clear Sky NET 21.7 Wm-2
    The all sky included clouds, the clear sky, is sort of self explanatory.
    It sure looks like the clear sky TOA net FLUX is 36 times greater than the all sky,
    I.E. Clouds drop the amount of net FLUX by a large number.
    What proportion of the earth has clouds at any one time and are all clouds having similar effects?

  3. #683
    Sage
    Tim the plumber's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Sheffield
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:29 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    13,282

    Re: Svensmark Closes the Loop -- The Missing Link Between GCR's, Clouds and Climate

    Quote Originally Posted by Visbek View Post
    Really? How fascinating. Because I have it on good authority that a great deal of the uncertainty in the temperature variations we've observed is a result of not fully understanding the interplay of heat and.... clouds.

    Who said that? Oh, it was the IPCC. Which you quoted, over and over and over again. "In reality, due to feedbacks, the response of the climate system is much more complex. It is believed that the overall effect of the feedbacks amplifies the temperature increase to 1.5 to 4.5C. A significant part of this uncertainty range arises from our limited knowledge of clouds and their interactions with radiation."

    I really love the fact that you've been hammering on about this for days, and then just drop it without a second thought. Based on a PowerPoint. In Comic Sans. Which explains the updates and corrections in v4 of the CERES data product. (I mean, really, do you even bother to look at what you're linking?)

    Posted by Longview, post 671 ;There seems to be quite a bit of dependency on the roll that clouds play in Earth's energy balance.
    The CERES satellite was launched to measure some of these things directly.
    https://ceres.larc.nasa.gov/document...TOA_Update.pdf
    The Global Mean TOA Flux (Wm-2) Ed2.8
    March 2000 June 2015
    All sky NET 0.60 Wm-2
    Clear Sky NET 21.7 Wm-2
    The all sky included clouds, the clear sky, is sort of self explanatory.
    It sure looks like the clear sky TOA net FLUX is 36 times greater than the all sky,
    I.E. Clouds drop the amount of net FLUX by a large number.
    Hardly dropping it is it?!!!!!!

    Wake up!!!

  4. #684
    Sage
    longview's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:03 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    22,898

    Re: Svensmark Closes the Loop -- The Missing Link Between GCR's, Clouds and Climate

    Quote Originally Posted by Visbek View Post
    Words have meaning. I've already cited the passages where the IPCC flatly rejected Svensmark's theories. Yet again, if you do not understand that very simple fact, it's not my problem.



    Oh, really?

    Tell us all then, what exactly are Svensmark's theories? And how am I mischaracterizing them?
    The IPCC does not flatly reject Svensmark's theories, they simply do not assign a large role to
    the amount of clouds formed from cosmic rays.

    How have you characterized Svensmark's theories, well let's see?
    In Post #644 you said,
    CRs (from outside our solar system) are a fraction of the effects of solar irradiation.
    And solar irradiation is (in the view of the IPCC) a tiny amount of the variation in global temperatures.


    IPCC explicitly ruled out Svensmark's theories as having an effect.
    Svensmark's theorie is not that cosmic rays are effecting solar irradiation,
    but rather that changes from the sun regulate the amount of cosmic rays that can enter the atmosphere.
    Your and through your inference the IPCC's position is that CRs are a very small external heat source,
    Svensmark's theorie is solar changes cause cosmic rays to be like an inverting amplifier.
    Actually not so subtle of a difference.

  5. #685
    Sage
    longview's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:03 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    22,898

    Re: Svensmark Closes the Loop -- The Missing Link Between GCR's, Clouds and Climate

    Quote Originally Posted by Visbek View Post
    Really? How fascinating. Because I have it on good authority that a great deal of the uncertainty in the temperature variations we've observed is a result of not fully understanding the interplay of heat and.... clouds.

    Who said that? Oh, it was the IPCC. Which you quoted, over and over and over again. "In reality, due to feedbacks, the response of the climate system is much more complex. It is believed that the overall effect of the feedbacks amplifies the temperature increase to 1.5 to 4.5C. A significant part of this uncertainty range arises from our limited knowledge of clouds and their interactions with radiation."

    I really love the fact that you've been hammering on about this for days, and then just drop it without a second thought. Based on a PowerPoint. In Comic Sans. Which explains the updates and corrections in v4 of the CERES data product. (I mean, really, do you even bother to look at what you're linking?)
    Baede in 2001 says we have a limited understanding about clouds and radiation (They did not say heat).
    In 2016 (only 15 years later) we have some actual measurements of energy in and out from a satellite,
    which is you had bothered more than a quick glean would have seen the statement,
    EBAF-TOA Ed2.8 (Current Version), but it makes little difference.
    The Global Mean TOA Flux (Wm-2) Ed2.8
    March 2000 June 2015
    All sky NET 0.60 Wm-2
    Clear Sky NET 21.7 Wm-2

    The Global Mean TOA Flux (Wm-2) Ed4.0
    March 2000 June 2015
    All sky NET 0.63 Wm-2
    Clear Sky NET 18.3 Wm-2
    So in the newer version the clear sky flux is 29 times greater than the all sky flux, instead of 36 times,
    It still says clouds have a much greater effect than that assigned by the IPCC models.

  6. #686
    Sage
    longview's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:03 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    22,898

    Re: Svensmark Closes the Loop -- The Missing Link Between GCR's, Clouds and Climate

    Quote Originally Posted by Tim the plumber View Post
    What proportion of the earth has clouds at any one time and are all clouds having similar effects?
    I have heard numbers for average cloud coverage, but without a link, it would only be my poor memory.
    From what I have read different clouds have different effects, ceres would be looking at the overall average,
    and the clear sky having 29 to 36 times more flux than the all sky, says clouds have a very large negative forcing effect.
    Keep in mind the total energy imbalance from doubling the CO2 level, is supposed to be 3.71 Wm-2,
    but the measured clear sky vs all sky number is 17.67 Wm-2.

  7. #687
    Traveler

    Jack Hays's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Williamsburg, Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    80,167
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Svensmark Closes the Loop -- The Missing Link Between GCR's, Clouds and Climate

    Quote Originally Posted by Sunsettommy View Post
    Jack Hays, did you see this?

    Science Daily

    The missing link between exploding stars, clouds, and climate on Earth

    Excerpt:

    Breakthrough in understanding of how cosmic rays from supernovae can influence Earth's cloud cover and thereby climate

    December 19, 2017

    Technical University of Denmark

    Summary:

    The study reveals how atmospheric ions, produced by the energetic cosmic rays raining down through the atmosphere, helps the growth and formation of cloud condensation nuclei -- the seeds necessary for forming clouds in the atmosphere.

    LINK
    Yes, I did. Thank you.
    "Waste no more time arguing what a good man should be. Be one." --Marcus Aurelius

  8. #688
    Sage
    Visbek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 03:42 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    14,165

    Re: Svensmark Closes the Loop -- The Missing Link Between GCR's, Clouds and Climate

    Quote Originally Posted by longview View Post
    Baede in 2001 says we have a limited understanding about clouds and radiation (They did not say heat).
    I know this is hard for you, but... read the entire paragraph. It's talking about infrared radiation. That's heat.

    I mean, seriously, what do you think they're talking about? X-rays? Microwaves? Gamma rays?


    In 2016 (only 15 years later) we have some actual measurements of energy in and out from a satellite,
    which is you had bothered more than a quick glean would have seen the statement,
    EBAF-TOA Ed2.8 (Current Version), but it makes little difference.
    If you had done more than a quick glean, you'd realize that the document you linked does not draw conclusions about CERES data. What it does is show the differences between 2.8 and 4.

    And yes, that means that 2.8 is the older version, which was replaced by version 4. You can see this on the NOAA Data Quality Survey page, for example:
    https://ceres.larc.nasa.gov/dqs.php

    I mean, seriously. What does it say on the first page? CERES Energy Balanced and Filled (EBAF) - TOA Edition 4 Update (Emphasis added).

    Someone has to analyze the CERES data, and see if or how it correlates to temperature variations on regional and/or global levels and/or different strata (e.g. ocean, land, troposphere etc). Here's an example of that type of work:
    Climate variability and relationships between top-of-atmosphere radiation and temperatures on Earth - Trenberth - 2015 - Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres - Wiley Online Library
    "Everyone should listen to me all the time about everything." - Rosa Diaz

    "When the mistakes fall disproportionately on one side, it is no respect for the notion of truth to pretend that everything is even." - Lee McIntyre

  9. #689
    Sage
    longview's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:03 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    22,898

    Re: Svensmark Closes the Loop -- The Missing Link Between GCR's, Clouds and Climate

    Quote Originally Posted by Visbek View Post
    I know this is hard for you, but... read the entire paragraph. It's talking about infrared radiation. That's heat.

    I mean, seriously, what do you think they're talking about? X-rays? Microwaves? Gamma rays?



    If you had done more than a quick glean, you'd realize that the document you linked does not draw conclusions about CERES data. What it does is show the differences between 2.8 and 4.

    And yes, that means that 2.8 is the older version, which was replaced by version 4. You can see this on the NOAA Data Quality Survey page, for example:
    https://ceres.larc.nasa.gov/dqs.php

    I mean, seriously. What does it say on the first page? CERES Energy Balanced and Filled (EBAF) - TOA Edition 4 Update (Emphasis added).

    Someone has to analyze the CERES data, and see if or how it correlates to temperature variations on regional and/or global levels and/or different strata (e.g. ocean, land, troposphere etc). Here's an example of that type of work:
    Climate variability and relationships between top-of-atmosphere radiation and temperatures on Earth - Trenberth - 2015 - Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres - Wiley Online Library
    As I said, words have meaning, If they had wanted to limit the discussion of clouds to only infrared radiation,
    they could have said so. but the context is not only infrared radiation.
    When clouds are seen from space, what color are they?
    https://www.generation-nt.com/zoom-1...oto-terre.html
    If clouds only reflected infrared radiation, we would not see them from space, or the ground.
    Also recently, we have learned that thunderstorms emit gamma burst, that to is a cloud radiation interaction.

    As to the CERES data, both versions show that clouds have a very large (negative) effect on the energy balance.

  10. #690
    Traveler

    Jack Hays's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Williamsburg, Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    80,167
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Svensmark Closes the Loop -- The Missing Link Between GCR's, Clouds and Climate

    "Waste no more time arguing what a good man should be. Be one." --Marcus Aurelius

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •