You’ve probably all heard of Svensmark and the Galactic Cosmic Ray (GCR) to cloud cover modulation theory by now. Lot’s of warmists say it is “discredited”. However, CERN in Switzerland isn’t following that thinking, and after getting some encouraging results in the CLOUD06 experiment, they have funded a much larger and more comprehensive CLOUD09 experiment. I figure if it is “discredited”, a bunch of smart guys and gals like CERN wouldn’t be ramping up the investigation. There’s also word now of a new correlation:
I get so many tips now it is hard to choose, but this one is a gem. If you look at nothing else this month, please take the time to download the slide show from CERN’s Jasper Kirkby at the end of this article.
He does a superb job of tying it all together. I found Kirkby’s slide show quite interesting, and I’ve grabbed some slides for our WUWT readers. He proposes a GCR to cloud droplet mechanism, which to me, makes sense meteorologically. He also touches on the possibility that the Inter-Tropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ) may have been shifted due to GCR modulation during the LIA/Maunder Minimum. This ties in with Willis Eschenbach’s theories of the ITCZ being a “thermostatic mechanism” for the planet with some amplification effects. – Anthony
Norm Potter writes in Tips and Notes for WUWT with this-
The end is near for the warmists, I suspect. This month, Jasper Kirkby of CERN explained the Centre’s CLOUD experiment, which is moving forward:
“The current understanding of climate change in the industrial age is that it is predominantly caused by anthropogenic greenhouse gases, with relatively small natural contributions due to solar irradiance and volcanoes. However, palaeoclimatic reconstructions show that the climate has frequently varied on 100-year time scales during the Holocene (last 10 kyr) by amounts comparable to the present warming – and yet the mechanism or mechanisms are not understood. Some of these reconstructions show clear associations with solar variability, which is recorded in the light radio-isotope archives that measure past variations of cosmic ray intensity. However, despite the increasing evidence of its importance, solar-climate variability is likely to remain controversial until a physical mechanism is established.
“Estimated changes of solar irradiance on these time scales appear to be too small to account for the climate observations. This raises the question of whether cosmic rays may directly affect the climate, providing an effective indirect solar forcing mechanism. Indeed recent satellite observations – although disputed – suggest that cosmic rays may affect clouds. This talk presents an overview of the palaeoclimatic evidence for solar/cosmic ray forcing of the climate, and reviews the possible physical mechanisms. These will be investigated in the CLOUD experiment which begins to take data at the CERN PS later this year.”
I found this side on page 29 to be plausible from a meteorological standpoint:
Here is a slide showing the ITCZ shift he’s proposing:
And here is the data and some conjectures, obviously more data is needed. However what is seen so far certainly seems far from “discredited” as some warmists say.
In the conclusions of his slide show, Kirkby outlines the state of knowledge and areas of investigation:
• Climate has continually varied in the past, and the causes are not well understood – especially on the 100 year timescalerelevant for today’s climate change
• Strong evidence for solar-climate variability, but no established mechanism. A cosmic ray influence on clouds is a leading candidate
• CLOUD at CERN aims to study and quantify the cosmic raycloud mechanism in a controlled laboratory experiment
• The question of whether – and to what extent – the climate is influenced by solar/cosmic ray variability remains central to our understanding of anthropogenic climate change
More info, see: http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1181073/ – the CERN Colloquium
Download Kirkby’s Slide show (Large 7.8 MB PDF, be patient)
http://indico.cern.ch/getFile.py/access?resId=0&materialId=slides&confId=52576
Backup Copy on WUWT server: Kirkby_CERN_slideshow09
Let’s try that link again: See “Does a Global Temperature Exist?”
Leif Svalgaard (17:36:19) :
But there are indications that the GCR flux has been slowly decreasing over time
What are the possible reasons for that Leif?
Sun getting stronger? I doubt you’ll buy that. 😉
Or our changing location relative to the galaxy taking us into a ‘quieter zone’?
Or measurement error/bias, as is the case with so many of the other metrics you’ve had to adjust?
tallbloke (00:03:10) :
“I note Piers Corbyn says more will be revealed on Oct 28th because the world needs to know. He will time it for maximum effect on Copenhagen.”
I do believe Piers has a few answers regarding solar influences beyond variations in TSI. I will be interested to see what he reveals on Oct 28th. I have read that he has an interest in sudden stratospheric heating events. Leif has previously indicated to me that there is some very minor hale cycle variation in flux tunneling events, but without reference as to their nature, passive or active. Piers may be working in this area. I must admit to being curious as to how he manages such long term predictions so close for very short lived events. He seems to get results , but how?
That said, with respect to solar influence I remain unconvinced with regard to reconstructions of past TSI variations. All I can trust is satellite records from the last few years. Extrapolations and reconstructions cut no ice with me. I also have questions about the influence of microwave frequency flux on water molecules that are not answered by black body absorption readings.
We are learning fast.
Peter Taylor (09:43:01) :
But a computer model is a natural atmosphere?
They ain’t going away anytime soon….. http://www.ipcc.ch/
The IPCC is currently starting to outline its Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) which will be finalized in 2014. As it has been the case in the past, the outline of the AR5 will be developed through a scoping process which involves climate change experts from all relevant disciplines and users of IPCC reports, in particular representatives from governments.
As a first step, experts, governments and organizations involved in the Fourth Assessment Report have been asked to submit comments and observations in writing. These submissions are currently being analysed by members of the Bureau.
The scoping meeting to define the outline of the AR5 is scheduled in Venice, Italy, for 13-17 July 2009 (attendance is by invitation only). The outline will be submitted to the 31st Session of the IPCC and Sessions of the three Working Groups, which will be held in Bali, Indonesia, 26-29 October 2009.
This is just a non-stop party…….
tallbloke (00:21:36) :
Leif Svalgaard (17:36:19) :
“But there are indications that the GCR flux has been slowly decreasing over time”
What are the possible reasons for that Leif?
Nobody knows, except it does not seem to be measurement errors. Here is an analysis by one of the foremost experts [whom I know and trust]:
http://neutronm.bartol.udel.edu/reprints/2007bieber.pdf
And his conclusion:
[40] In summary, we have not been able to identify any instrumental or environmental effect that could cause the long-term decrease in the South Pole neutron rate. Unless some such cause emerges in the future, it would appear the origin of the decrease must be a change in the Sun or solar wind, with an attendant change in the strength of solar modulation of cosmic rays [Ahluwalia and Lopate, 2001; Caballero-Lopez et al., 2004; McCracken et al., 2004a, 2004b], or possibly a change in the local interstellar density of Galactic cosmic rays [Stozhkov et al., 2000].
————-
Pick your poison.
Peter Taylor (09:43:01) :
Still, I would rather have seen those European Space Agency millions devoted to more exhaustive analysis of cloud patterns, ocean cycles, correlations to solar data etc., than to mechanisms that, at the end of the day, defenders of the faith will deny are relevant because a cloud chamber is not a natural atmosphere.
Well the first hurdle is to determine whether GCRs are capable of creating condensation nuclei in sufficient numbers. The second is where in the atmosphere is there a deficiency of such nuclei so that GCRs can have a significant effect?
Konrad (02:09:07) :
tallbloke (00:03:10) :
“I note Piers Corbyn says more will be revealed on Oct 28th because the world needs to know. He will time it for maximum effect on Copenhagen.”
He seems to get results , but how?
Heh, well I know, at least a good part of it, but I will hold my tongue and see what Piers reveals in October.
Leif Svalgaard (06:08:36) :
http://neutronm.bartol.udel.edu/reprints/2007bieber.pdf
it would appear the origin of the decrease must be a change in the Sun or solar wind, with an attendant change in the strength of solar modulation of cosmic rays [Ahluwalia and Lopate, 2001; Caballero-Lopez et al., 2004; McCracken et al., 2004a, 2004b], or possibly a change in the local interstellar density of Galactic cosmic rays [Stozhkov et al., 2000].
Well there is some increase left in the C20th solar wind after you recalibrated it for us isn’t there?
Occams razor would lean towards a solar cause rather than an unknown extra-solar system factor we haven’t measured wouldn’t it?
tallbloke (08:10:55) :
Well there is some increase left in the C20th solar wind after you recalibrated it for us isn’t there?
Occams razor would lean towards a solar cause rather than an unknown extra-solar system factor we haven’t measured wouldn’t it?
Not enough to make a difference. And at minima, when the modulation essentially disappear, the Sun and the solar wind and the cosmic ray flux should be the same, so that would argue for an interstellar cause, but it is WAY to uncertain to speculate to much. I only said that there were ‘some indications’ that the flux had decreased. At this point, making too much of it is premature. Perhaps when we have more ice cores or we understand the deposition processes [of 10Be] better, etc, we can say more. Or when we get cosmic ray proxies from other places in the solar system, e.g Martian or Lunar or European ices.
John S. (11:01:06) “If you cook the 20th century global temperature record, no physical mechanism will ever agree with it. But models will!”
Wise words.
Leif 8:39:55
European Ices. Who knew it could get so cold. Or how wet they don’t get. Thanks for stretching the imagination without speculating. Isn’t there an approx. 60 million year cycle of increasing and decreasing radiation, too, as we move in and out of some plane?
============================================
“… BUT THE CORRELATIONS BREAK DOWN AFTER …”
Of course the correlations break down! That is *exactly* what you would expect if you are looking at LINEAR shadows of NON-linear relations! It suggests a problem with assumptions. Only once all of the terms, interactions, & dimensionality are *fully* worked out will equations be linearizable. Perhaps some fluid is being treated as Newtonian when it should be treated as visco-elastic. And perhaps also some terms in some differential equations are being set to zero when this is not *always valid. Perhaps some mass is being treated as a point when it should be treated as a series of concentric shells with differential response to gravitational accelerations. Perhaps some probability density functions are being assumed to be of one form when they are really of another. Until the morphology of the various nonlinearities are all worked out you NEED to pay some more respect to phase relations Leif — and I’ve given you some big clues — if you haven’t turned up anything interesting with the clues I’ve shared about the Chandler wobble phase reversal, then I know you haven’t made much of an effort.
Leif Svalgaard (10:47:49) :
Gino (10:32:11) :
GCR theory has more to do with the strength and activity of the sun’s magnetic field and how it interacts with the earths field. Am I off the mark?
Not on the first point, yes on the second. The modulation of cosmic rays takes place far from Earth, way out in interplanetary space. But the modulation is very small, only a few percent, depending on energy.
But a few percent change in cloud cover would drown out any CO2 signal.
I think we’re missing the BIG picture.
1) We have had global cooling in the past which popular current models do not address, namely 5 ice ages which are acknowledged around the world.
2) There had to be massive global warming in the past to create a tropical world in northern Canada. Why? Because there are fossils of tropical ferns found up there.
3) Further evidence of global warming (without men) is Alaskan oil, which we are told comes from decomposition of vast quantities of animals and/or plants. We do not see such prolific life in the frozen north now, so it had to have been much warmer long ago.
In industry we certify measuring equipment by comparing its readings against a known standard before we allow them to be used. We must expect the same for climate change models. If they cannot explain known warming and cooling periods from the past, they are not reliable for explaining the future.
It was 10:00 PM EST in my small Eastampton NJ apartment Sunday evening June 28th 2009.
Blah Blah Blah on with it will you..
Alright, I had just settled in to bed and turned on the television(save your cackling for someone else I still enjoy (ed) some programming) To see if I could find any science programs on the Discovery Channel as I drifted off to sleep.But, alas sleep would not fond me so easily this evening.
I did indeed find some sort of “Documentary” purported to be about volcanic activity and the Dinosaurs. I tuned in last in the show and was catching up as best I could and it appeared to be a correlation theory between volcanic activity and the extinction. Now I have an understanding of volcanic activity and global climate. My understanding is that with massive volcanic activity massive and widespread global climate change can and is effected. We KNOW that the gasses and ash which are expelled in a volcanic eruption on the scale needed to effect climate change (Krakatoa for example) has been shown to in fact release enormous amounts of sulfur and methane and yes even Co2 along with enormous amounts of ash and indeed even superheated pyroclastic flows. The ice record and indeed even the historic records show the result to be an inexorable increase in acid rain and global dimming (from the mixing of the sulfur and atmospheric water in the form of sulfuric acid and dimming from the ash ) which is known to result in widespread death through crop loss as well as livestock losses and through prolonged artificial winter. In other words it causes GLOBAL COOLING. To my complete and utter surprise this particular program didn’t just suggest that these type of episodes in nature lead to GLOBAL WARMING, they actually said that they do and went on to say it was because of the massive amounts of Co2 which is released during these events. This is what probably killed the dinosaurs they concluded.
I almost stopped at the end of that program and was ready to give the tube a resounding and altogether destructive heave from the second story window and be done with it again forever. I weakened though and waited to see what the next program would bring.
WOW the next program was another “Documentary” on the volcanic eruptions in Siberia and Iceland and again the common theme was Co2 released and the earth warmed for over 200 years by 20 degrees. W>T>F>
I would find this amazing indeed and quite an idiotic oversight on the part of program editors consulting scientists and even production checkers if it hadn’t been for the “Scientists” which were presenting these “FACTS” . There was a young woman whom appeared to be fresh out of university and quite frankly I surmised must be of the “NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND” dogma of our American scholastic enterprise. Clearly she had no idea how to string those pesky little things called words together into a coherent sentence with anything resembling what one might expect from someone at least having graduated the ninth grade. I have no idea what her name was and she was more or less shrouded in darkness in what I can only surmise was an attempt to fool viewers in a smoke screen of , don’t pay attention to the man behind the curtain , just listen to my words as the wizard commands. The second man I saw I know I have seen before and I believe is connected to the IPCC and AL GORE and I can only assume is possibly behind the MANBEARPIG as well.
It became apparent that these were no mistakes and in fact I believe were actual plants to coincide with the cap and tax bill which is running to the senate at this point. Couple all of this with the media blackout of any discussion on this bill which will destroy more families and individuals and businesses than the entire collapse already has, and I find myself finally feeling the fear I knew was coming for me. Beside that fear however is a profound anger. Anger which stems to all levels of humanity which I encounter everyday. But mostly with myself for not doing more in the past. I am most definitely disappointed in my lack of judgment over the 39 years of my life. Belief in anything you cannot touch taste feel see or prove with empirical evidence has led us all down the road to bigotry, fear, hate, and downright stupidity.
Nevertheless I could not this time rest my head before taking action to alert as many as possible even in this small way to what I have witnessed firsthand. I now leave it to you….
P.S. The series was Prehistoric Disasters and the episodes were Asteroid Strike and Planet of Fire respectively
Peace