• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

CERN's CLOUD Experiment Highlights Pre-Industrial Climate and GCR's

Jack Hays

Traveler
Banned
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
94,823
Reaction score
28,236
Location
Williamsburg, Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Scientists following Svensmark's path investigating GCR influence on climate are starting to produce important results. Two new papers advance the discussion.

Aerosols / Cosmic rays
CERN’s CLOUD experiment results suggests industrial revolution reduced cloud cover, cosmic rays have an impact too

From CERN Our planet’s pre-industrial climate may have been cloudier than presently thought, shows CERN’s CLOUD experiment in two papers published in Nature. CERN experiment points to a cloudier pre-industrial climate In two papers1,2 published today in the journal Nature, new results from the CLOUD3experiment at CERN4 imply the baseline pristine pre-industrial climate may have…

In two papers[SUP]1,2[/SUP] published today in the journal Nature, new results from the CLOUD[SUP]3[/SUP]experiment at CERN[SUP]4[/SUP] imply the baseline pristine pre-industrial climate may have been cloudier than presently thought. CLOUD shows that organic vapours emitted by trees produce abundant aerosol particles in the atmosphere in the absence of sulphuric acid. Previously it was thought that sulphuric acid – which largely arises from fossil fuels – was essential to initiate aerosol particle formation. CLOUD finds that these so-called biogenic vapours are also key to the growth of the newly-formed particles up to sizes where they can seed clouds.
“These results are the most important so far by the CLOUD experiment at CERN,” said CLOUD spokesperson, Jasper Kirkby. “When the nucleation and growth of pure biogenic aerosol particles is included in climate models, it should sharpen our understanding of the impact of human activities on clouds and climate.”
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) considers that the increase in aerosols and clouds since pre-industrial times represents one of the largest sources of uncertainty in climate change[SUP]5[/SUP]. CLOUD is designed to understand how new aerosol particles form and grow in the atmosphere, and their effect on clouds and climate.
CLOUD also finds that ions from galactic cosmic rays strongly enhance the production rate of pure biogenic particles – by a factor 10-100 compared with particles without ions. This suggests that cosmic rays may have played a more important role in aerosol and cloud formation in pre-industrial times than in today’s polluted atmosphere.
A paper published simultaneously in Science (Bianchi, F., et al. Science, doi 10.1126/ science.aad5456(link is external), 2016) describes an observation of pure organic nucleation at the Jungfraujoch observatory by the same mechanism reported by CLOUD. The measurements did not involve CLOUD directly but most of the authors are also members of the CLOUD collaboration.
“The observation of pure organic nucleation at the Jungfraujoch is very satisfying,” said Kirkby. “It confirms that the same process discovered by CLOUD in the laboratory also takes place in the atmosphere.”

 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
79,226
Reaction score
35,339
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Remember when the right-wingers were claiming CERN had already declared "Cosmic rays, not CO2, control climate?"

I guess those claims were premature.
 

Jack Hays

Traveler
Banned
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
94,823
Reaction score
28,236
Location
Williamsburg, Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Remember when the right-wingers were claiming CERN had already declared "Cosmic rays, not CO2, control climate?"

I guess those claims were premature.

Really? Could you provide an example of such a claim?
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
79,226
Reaction score
35,339
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Really? Could you provide an example of such a claim?

MINA Breaking News - CERN to World's Idiots: Sun, Not Man, Controls Earth's Climate
CERN: Sun, not man, controls Earth’s climate » Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!
CERN: The Sun, Not Man, Causes Climate Change | Alternative

I could give a hundred more but it's the way the right-wing media circle works, thousands of copy/pastes of the same thing. Even made a Yahoo news article written by some Heritage Foundation guy, or something, IIRC.
 

Jack Hays

Traveler
Banned
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
94,823
Reaction score
28,236
Location
Williamsburg, Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
MINA Breaking News - CERN to World's Idiots: Sun, Not Man, Controls Earth's Climate
CERN: Sun, not man, controls Earth’s climate » Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!
CERN: The Sun, Not Man, Causes Climate Change | Alternative

I could give a hundred more but it's the way the right-wing media circle works, thousands of copy/pastes of the same thing. Even made a Yahoo news article written by some Heritage Foundation guy, or something, IIRC.

Two of your links are indeed the same article. I'll concede this point. Of course they may be proven right . . . .
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
79,226
Reaction score
35,339
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Two of your links are indeed the same article. I'll concede this point. Of course they may be proven right . . . .

Well, no. They were insisting that CERN was making such a claim. CERN was not. That's over and done, false.

Also, CERN will never make such a claim because that's way the hell outside their scope.
 

Jack Hays

Traveler
Banned
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
94,823
Reaction score
28,236
Location
Williamsburg, Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Well, no. They were insisting that CERN was making such a claim. CERN was not. That's over and done, false.

Also, CERN will never make such a claim because that's way the hell outside their scope.

Just rhetorical license. No reasonable person would have read that and concluded CERN made the claim.
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
79,226
Reaction score
35,339
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Just rhetorical license. No reasonable person would have read that and concluded CERN made the claim.

I find that many so-called climate skeptics are not, in fact, reasonable people.
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
79,226
Reaction score
35,339
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
What do you think of the papers in the OP?

It's more information about how clouds develop. Not an awful lot to say about it.

I imagine you think this is evidence against AGW, somehow.
 

Tim the plumber

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 3, 2014
Messages
16,501
Reaction score
3,815
Location
Sheffield
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
It's more information about how clouds develop. Not an awful lot to say about it.

I imagine you think this is evidence against AGW, somehow.

If clouds are formed more by an earth with lots of trees then the preindustrial temperatures used as a baseline for the scary temperature increase were lower due to these clouds then it's not been CO2 warming the earth but less trees.

This makes any suggestion of runaway warming silly.
 

RetiredUSN

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 13, 2016
Messages
26,621
Reaction score
13,551
Location
Norfolk Virginia area.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
If clouds are formed more by an earth with lots of trees then the preindustrial temperatures used as a baseline for the scary temperature increase were lower due to these clouds then it's not been CO2 warming the earth but less trees.

This makes any suggestion of runaway warming silly.

There are also more trees on earth than there were 100 years ago.
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
79,226
Reaction score
35,339
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
If clouds are formed more by an earth with lots of trees then the preindustrial temperatures used as a baseline for the scary temperature increase were lower due to these clouds then it's not been CO2 warming the earth but less trees.

This makes any suggestion of runaway warming silly.

Why can't it be both?
 

Threegoofs

COVID survivor
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 31, 2013
Messages
53,891
Reaction score
19,776
Location
The birthplace of Italian Beef
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
There are also more trees on earth than there were 100 years ago.

Well, sure, that's what the SCIENTISTS say!

But we all know the scientists are wrong about stuff.

Or are the tree counting scientists not part of the giant worldwide conspiracy?
 

Threegoofs

COVID survivor
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 31, 2013
Messages
53,891
Reaction score
19,776
Location
The birthplace of Italian Beef
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
There are also more trees on earth than there were 100 years ago.

Well, sure, that's what the SCIENTISTS say!

But we all know the scientists are wrong about stuff.

Or are the tree counting scientists not part of the giant worldwide conspiracy?
 

Tim the plumber

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 3, 2014
Messages
16,501
Reaction score
3,815
Location
Sheffield
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Originally Posted by Tim the plumber View Post
If clouds are formed more by an earth with lots of trees then the preindustrial temperatures used as a baseline for the scary temperature increase were lower due to these clouds then it's not been CO2 warming the earth but less trees.

This makes any suggestion of runaway warming silly.

Why can't it be both?

The argument from the alarmist side is that all the warming since the temperature records became numeric in about 1850 has been due to human release of CO2.

If that is not the case then the expected warming due to more CO2 will be lowered. Thus no billion dollar budgets for research etc.
 

joG

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 27, 2013
Messages
43,839
Reaction score
9,638
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Scientists following Svensmark's path investigating GCR influence on climate are starting to produce important results. Two new papers advance the discussion.

Aerosols / Cosmic rays
CERN’s CLOUD experiment results suggests industrial revolution reduced cloud cover, cosmic rays have an impact too

From CERN Our planet’s pre-industrial climate may have been cloudier than presently thought, shows CERN’s CLOUD experiment in two papers published in Nature. CERN experiment points to a cloudier pre-industrial climate In two papers1,2 published today in the journal Nature, new results from the CLOUD3experiment at CERN4 imply the baseline pristine pre-industrial climate may have…

In two papers[SUP]1,2[/SUP] published today in the journal Nature, new results from the CLOUD[SUP]3[/SUP]experiment at CERN[SUP]4[/SUP] imply the baseline pristine pre-industrial climate may have been cloudier than presently thought. CLOUD shows that organic vapours emitted by trees produce abundant aerosol particles in the atmosphere in the absence of sulphuric acid. Previously it was thought that sulphuric acid – which largely arises from fossil fuels – was essential to initiate aerosol particle formation. CLOUD finds that these so-called biogenic vapours are also key to the growth of the newly-formed particles up to sizes where they can seed clouds.
“These results are the most important so far by the CLOUD experiment at CERN,” said CLOUD spokesperson, Jasper Kirkby. “When the nucleation and growth of pure biogenic aerosol particles is included in climate models, it should sharpen our understanding of the impact of human activities on clouds and climate.”
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) considers that the increase in aerosols and clouds since pre-industrial times represents one of the largest sources of uncertainty in climate change[SUP]5[/SUP]. CLOUD is designed to understand how new aerosol particles form and grow in the atmosphere, and their effect on clouds and climate.
CLOUD also finds that ions from galactic cosmic rays strongly enhance the production rate of pure biogenic particles – by a factor 10-100 compared with particles without ions. This suggests that cosmic rays may have played a more important role in aerosol and cloud formation in pre-industrial times than in today’s polluted atmosphere.
A paper published simultaneously in Science (Bianchi, F., et al. Science, doi 10.1126/ science.aad5456(link is external), 2016) describes an observation of pure organic nucleation at the Jungfraujoch observatory by the same mechanism reported by CLOUD. The measurements did not involve CLOUD directly but most of the authors are also members of the CLOUD collaboration.
“The observation of pure organic nucleation at the Jungfraujoch is very satisfying,” said Kirkby. “It confirms that the same process discovered by CLOUD in the laboratory also takes place in the atmosphere.”


Other than that it seems to substantiate that we have a very shaky understanding of climate physics, I am not sure, what the findings mean.
 

Jack Hays

Traveler
Banned
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
94,823
Reaction score
28,236
Location
Williamsburg, Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Other than that it seems to substantiate that we have a very shaky understanding of climate physics, I am not sure, what the findings mean.

GCR climate research is new, and still finding its way.
 

joG

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 27, 2013
Messages
43,839
Reaction score
9,638
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
GCR climate research is new, and still finding its way.

I know Svensmark's articles and book, but did not quite understand, what the piece of research that you linked meant for the GCR path.
 

Jack Hays

Traveler
Banned
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
94,823
Reaction score
28,236
Location
Williamsburg, Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I know Svensmark's articles and book, but did not quite understand, what the piece of research that you linked meant for the GCR path.

It's all about cloud formation.
 

joG

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 27, 2013
Messages
43,839
Reaction score
9,638
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
It's all about cloud formation.

....and cosmic rays and energy from the sun. ;)

Actually I have liked the theory from the beginning. It seems elegant in a confusing way and makes physics type sense. It probably would not explain the whole climate issue. But without it, the debate is also incomplete.
 

Jack Hays

Traveler
Banned
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
94,823
Reaction score
28,236
Location
Williamsburg, Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
....and cosmic rays and energy from the sun. ;)

Actually I have liked the theory from the beginning. It seems elegant in a confusing way and makes physics type sense. It probably would not explain the whole climate issue. But without it, the debate is also incomplete.

I look at it this way. Conventional global warming theory is basically 19th century science: good as far as it goes, but limited and static. The work of Svensmark and those following in his track draws on newer, bigger science that was not part of the 19th century vocabulary. :bright:
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
79,226
Reaction score
35,339
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
The argument from the alarmist side is that all the warming since the temperature records became numeric in about 1850 has been due to human release of CO2.

How many times to I have to tell you that this is explicitly not the case? We've had this exact conversation before. The IPCC explicitly says part of the warming is attributable to other factors. It's black and white. So why must you keep saying this?
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
79,226
Reaction score
35,339
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I look at it this way. Conventional global warming theory is basically 19th century science: good as far as it goes, but limited and static. The work of Svensmark and those following in his track draws on newer, bigger science that was not part of the 19th century vocabulary. :bright:

Riiight. Nobody on the proponent side has researched anything new since the 1800s. Sure buddy. :lamo
 
Top Bottom