Friday, 2 September 2011

AGW - CERN proves it's Cosmic Rays ...

This is a story that begins back in 1996 with two very qualified Danish scientists and, as the Telegraph article "Sun causes Climate Change Shock" says, it goes downhill from there. In fact the campaign by the AGW proponents who immediately saw the risk to their lucrative funding, money making scams and the entire "Green" industry, would make an excellent plot for a book. But fiction is often never as convoluted as reality, and this is no exception.

This story has everything, from the character assassination of respected scientists who failed to grasp the political implications of their openness in voicing their findings, to the science magazine editor removed from his post for refusing to bow to pressure from the AGW lobby. The article quotes Lawrence Solomon -

The hypothesis that cosmic rays and the sun hold the key to the global warming debate has been Enemy No. 1 to the global warming establishment ever since it was first proposed by two scientists from the Danish Space Research Institute, at a 1996 scientific conference in the U.K. Within one day, the chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Bert Bolin, denounced the theory, saying, “I find the move from this pair scientifically extremely naive and irresponsible.” He then set about discrediting the theory, any journalist that gave the theory cre dence, and most of all the Danes presenting the theory — they soon found themselves vilified, marginalized and starved of funding, despite their impeccable scientific credentials.

One reason why the CERN experiment is not more widely publicised is that CERN might lose its funding if it dared to enter the cut throat arena that is Green Politics and AGW/Climate Change. The last thing politicians, Green Lobbyists, windmill manufacturers and the anti-modern industry, commerce and everything else lobbies want is proof that Anthropomorphic Global Warming is a myth. As the Director of CERN says -

I have asked the colleagues to present the results clearly, but not to interpret them. That would go immediately into the highly political arena of the climate change debate. One has to make clear that cosmic radiation is only one of many parameters.

(The emphasis there is mine.)

So what is all the fuss about. Again I quote from the Telegraph article -

The research, published with little fanfare this week in the prestigious journal Nature, comes from ├╝ber-prestigious CERN, the European Organization for Nuclear Research, one of the world’s largest centres for scientific research involving 60 countries and 8,000 scientists at more than 600 universities and national laboratories. CERN is the organization that invented the World Wide Web, that built the multi-billion dollar Large Hadron Collider, and that has now built a pristinely clean stainless steel chamber that precisely recreated the Earth’s atmosphere.

In this chamber, 63 CERN scientists from 17 European and American institutes have done what global warming doomsayers said could never be done — demonstrate that cosmic rays promote the formation of molecules that in Earth’s atmosphere can grow and seed clouds, the cloudier and thus cooler it will be. Because the sun’s magnetic field controls how many cosmic rays reach Earth’s atmosphere (the stronger the sun’s magnetic field, the more it shields Earth from incoming cosmic rays from space), the sun determines the temperature on Earth.

Not surprisingly, some scientists have smelled the large rat and blown the whistle -

CERN has joined a long line of lesser institutions obliged to remain politically correct about the man-made global warming hypothesis. It’s OK to enter “the highly political arena of the climate change debate” provided your results endorse man-made warming, but not if they support Svensmark’s heresy that the Sun alters the climate by influencing the cosmic ray influx and cloud formation.


The once illustrious CERN laboratory ceases to be a truly scientific institute when its Director General forbids its physicists and visiting experimenters to draw the obvious scientific conclusions from their results

So there you have it. It is all about funding. Toe the line on AGW, and you can have all the money you want. But if you have something which shows up the AGW scam - suppress it or your funding will go the same way as the original Danish Scientists research. Straight down the tubes. As many members of the non-scientific public have begun to suspect, all this talk about reducing "our carbon footprint" (an oxymoron, since all life on this planet is Carbon based) is really about controlling resources, funding for certain research, population movement and mobility and wealth.

Do read the full article I have linked above.

No comments:

Post a Comment