This is the second video in the TEDed / CERN series created for the TEDxCERN event held on 25 September 2014. Jasper Kirkby explains why scientists need to understand more about aerosols and clouds in order to predict the rise in the Earth’s surface temperature with more precision. The CLOUD experiment at CERN aims to help scientists understand how clouds are formed in the atmosphere, view the full lesson here (link is external)
Stay tuned for the final video in this series later this week.
For more info on this years event see TEDxCERN (link is external) where the videos for this year’s talks will soon be available.
h/t to WUWT Alec aka Daffy Duck
This graphic may help in understanding, but is not part of the CERN video.
![COSMICRAYSvsCLOUDS1[1]](https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/cosmicraysvsclouds11.jpg?quality=83)
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
And just to show how simple I am. Pre-Industrial times of course /sarc; the Earth has been almost completely covered in ice but, has also been ice free. Doesn’t the vast differential in temperatures between the two states account for natural variation? After all it happened before mankind evolved. So how do they identify the effects of 0.04% CO2 x 1.7% (0.0007% anthropogenic of GHG) and the enormous difference of natural variation?.
Why does the woman in the animation have Mickey Mouse shaped hair and cookie monster eyes?
“Jasper Kirkby explains why scientists need to understand more about aerosols and clouds in order to predict the rise in the Earth’s surface temperature with more precision.”
HUH?!?!?!?! The temps can only go up?!?!?!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
I’m late to this but having listened to this video twice I am encouraged that there is an acceptance at CERN that the science isn’t settled, I agree that wording has been careful but I would like to hear more discussion from the likes of CERN on previous climatic conditions. Life on Earth has been interrupted so many times in its history and our very small bit of Earth time is a relatively benign period. But it is likely to be short-lived and most of life on Earth has progressed through periods of climate far warmer and CO2 richer than our current inter-glacial period. What I would like to understand is the variability of the energy received from the sun, it appears, in this video, to be a constant irrespective of the radiation of the energy back into space. I am no physicist but I understood that the energy received from the sun is not a constant, the sun is not static and the energy output is variable. I would appreciate being put right on this point, but if there is a variation how does this fit into the equation? Finally, the video begins with the benchmark guesstimate of 1.5 degrees C to 4.5 degrees C and relates it the change in global temperature since the last ice-age. It would be interesting to have CERN explain why there was an ice-age, what the conditions were previous to the ice-age and what conditions would there need to be in order for the ice-age to return. We already know most of this, but if we are (as a scientific species) to seek to understand what is happening now, what will happen the future, we must relate it to the past and in detail. After all one of the main criteria in any science, is being able to repeat the experiment in order to prove or disprove the hypothesis. Clearly we cannot do this with eons of climate behind us, but understanding where we are now and hypothesising on future climate requires an explanation of past climate and how it relates to the present. The presentation in the video is simplistic and suitable for all but Kuhnat is correct, temperatures can only go up? Past evidence, I believe, says not and CERN should demonstrate this. Milodonharlani has made the point I always make to anyone who cares to listen to my ramblings, Constable did not paint clear blue summer skies. All his paintings were compilations of sketches made during the summer months. There is plenty of cloud in all of them.
So next step (similar to spacecraft/satellite shielding) is the construction of equatorial electromagnetic meshes to cut the excessive cosmic rays and reduce their impact on Earth!
So, post 1750 – the start of the industrial revolution- is used to assess the affect of CO2 from human activity on climate.
But wait !!
Prior to 1750 were there not many periods in which the climate was much warmer than today?
….. And many periods in which it was much colder than today? …….and many (all ?) of these warm periods ended as colder climates became extant?………and all these warmer periods eventually ended as colder climate arrived?
So then , WHAT CAUSED ALL THESE PRE-INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION DRAMATIC CHANGES IN CLIMATE??
As is the norm, the AGW, Lysenkian religious zealots ignore the $1000000000 question.
Why?
Because they haven’t a clue as to the answer.
And they have not a clue because they DO NOT KNOW what are all the myriad variables and their interactions that cause climate to change.
If you cannot explain the historical climate , you cannot presume to predict the climate with even the most tenuous degree of reliability.
It is simply astounding that ALL these climate models, a priori, ASSUME that it is CO2, and ONLY CO2, that drives climate. Nothing else. And that every other conceivable variable that can affect climate serves only to mitigate or amplify the affect of CO2 on climate.
Amazing coincidence, is it not, that CO2 is a by product of industrial / economic activity and progress.