From our WUWT.TV 24 hour broadcast answer to Al Gore’s dirty weather on November 14-15, 2012. Dr. Sebastian Lüning of Dr. Franz Vahrenholt are co-authors of the book “Die Kalt Sonne” which we previously reviewed here and here on WUWT. Here, in this interview and presentation, Lüning, who is a geologist by trade, explains how he was converted to climate skepticism by his own research.
It is a powerful demonstration of how people can come to understand just how flimsy the evidence is for catastrophic global warming, and is well worth your time to watch.
Related articles
- WUWT-TV To Counter Al Gore’s ‘Dirty Weather Report’ With Live webcast (prnewswire.com)
- Announcement: WUWT-TV to counter Al Gore’s ’24 Hours of Climate Reality’ with live webcast (wattsupwiththat.com)
- Another WUWT.TV segment – Engineer and aviation pioneer Burt Rutan on why he doubts global warming (wattsupwiththat.com)
- More WUWT.TV video segments – Joe D’Aleo on Hurricane Sandy and extreme weather (wattsupwiththat.com)
- Another WUWT.TV segment – interview with director Pete Garcia on the movie ‘The Boy Who Cried Warming’ (wattsupwiththat.com)
- WUWT-TV To Counter Al Gore’s ‘Dirty Weather Report’ With Live webcast (sys-con.com)
Many thanks for an outstanding presentation. I can’t wait to buy and read the English edition of the book. The link between solar activity and the global climate seems undeniable.
.
There’s one obvious point. Luning assumes that the one degree per doubling of CO2 applies to the climate system so that his predicted temperature eventually goes up towards the end of the century. Although Gore resorted to fraud in his demonstration, I assume that the one degree per doubling effect is genuine and can be demonstrated in the laboratory.
.
But what proof is there that this applies to the climate system? If it were true then it should be crystal clear in the ice cores going back almost a million years. But, as far as I’m aware, there is no evidence in the ice cores that CO2 had any effect on the temperature. The ice cores clearly show that CO2 follows the temperature by around 800 years. It’s almost as if AGW works in the laboratory but not in the Earth’s climate. If so, then this century is likely to be dominated by severe and prolonged global cooling.
Chris
Gene Selkov, Simon Shnoll’s finding that radioactive decay followed a pattern corresponding with certain extraterrestrial positions was an interesting point in a very informative multifaceted interview. Thank you for that link.
Sorry this is a bit off topic but I recall seeing on WUWT that a subset of the members of the US National Academy of Sciences did a magnificent critique of the notion that the issue of CO2 caused global warming is settled. But, try as I might , I have been unable to find it. Can anyone point me in the right direction.
. . Ted Swart. .
“The ice cores clearly show that CO2 follows the temperature by around 800 years.”
Maybe CO2 dilutes the water vapor to the point that CO2 actually cools the atmosphere, thus a cooler atmosphere has even less water vapor and accelerated cooling. That is what the ice core research could be indicating with the current sun/earth relationship.
Gene Selkov says: “…I have transcribed a talk by my old-time mentor Simon Shnoll and put it out on YouTube as a poor man’s translation of his observations…If you are patient with this method of presentation, you will be rewarded with shocking new knowledge. It is about measuring things properly.”
What a treasure! Acerbic irony and great wisdom. A man not afraid to say “I don’t know.” A pity the US can’t divert a few million towards that field of study. Oh, well, the money would probably corrupt the researchers, if they’re anything like the AGW crowd. What is the status of this work?
“But what proof is there that this applies to the climate system? If it were true then it should be crystal clear in the ice cores going back almost a million years. But, as far as I’m aware, there is no evidence in the ice cores that CO2 had any effect on the temperature. The ice cores clearly show that CO2 follows the temperature by around 800 years. It’s almost as if AGW works in the laboratory but not in the Earth’s climate. If so, then this century is likely to be dominated by severe and prolonged global cooling.” –Chris
Evolution of CO2 from the oceans by higher temperatures can be well simulated on a micro scale in the laboratory. The difference between theory and reality for that system is small; results can be easily adjusted to reflect any relevant physical differences. The greenhouse effect, on the other hand, being distributed throughout 7 miles of a complex, non-homogeneous atmosphere in which competing processes occur, with multiple negative feedbacks, can’t be similarly mimicked [though there were early attempts to do so, occasionally mentioned by others in various WUWT threads]. The difference between simple, lab-scale IR absorption by CO2 molecules and actual AGW is huge, not fully understood, and not easily corrected by models or any other method.
Bottom line: the mechanism for CO2 following temperature is well established. The putative mechanism for CO2 leading temperature is speculative at best, fictional at worst. AGW theory rests on a highly tenuous foundation.
It’s Fritz Vahrenholt, not “Franz”…
highflight56433 says:
November 30, 2012 at 1:14 pm
….Managing living in the cooler/warmer periods is one thing, lack of rain for crops/drinking is substantial.
____________________________________
The Australians may end up being thankful for those idle desalination plants. Mini-thorium nuclear and desalination plants for the Sahara, India southern USA and China may become necessary.
The fact the UK refuses to build more reservoirs and the USA is actively wiping out dams is absolutely idiotic.
When the fecal material hits the rotating blades due to global cooling/drought and idiotic CAGW/environmental policies have made things much worse, I would not want to be a well known activist or for that matter a politician. There are too many dangerous nutters out there.
(Please note I am a past member of Greenpeace, Sierra Club… There are reasonable environmental policies and then there are control freaks)
Gene Selkov says: @ur momisugly November 30, 2012 at 3:22 pm
I could post just the transcript, but it is a bit too squirrely for a written medium and there are some important visuals to go with it. If you are patient with this method of presentation, you will be rewarded with shocking new knowledge. It is about measuring things properly.
________________________________
It is very hard to measure things properly. Ask any QC chemist who has worked in industry especially with new products.
Gail at 5:18pm – if you listen/read the entire presentation, you will discover that there are a couple of decades of reproducible data from various scientists with eye opening results which yearn for interpretation.
Possible solar origin of the 1,470-year glacial climate cycle demonstrated in a coupled model
We conclude that the glacial 1,470-year climate cycles could have been triggered by solar forcing despite the absence of a 1,470-year solar cycle.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v438/n7065/abs/nature04121.html
Apply Anthony’s transistor analogy to that, insofar as the response of the elephant in the atmosphere’s salon (water vapour) goes. An uptick in CO2 switches on a more potent H2O response — in the opposite direction. Sort of a NOR gate. 😉