Cosmic rays, not carbon dioxide, cause climate change
When a Nobel Prize-winning physicist, Dr John Clauser, labels the claims about greenhouse gases warming the Earth as “pseudoscience” and describes them as “a dangerous corruption of science,” I urge you to take notice. He furt...
Nope. Climate change is still bullshit no matter what’s not causing it
The "Svensmark Cloud mystery" is quite well researched. Cosmic rays increasingly penetrate the earths magnetic field during weak solar cycles. Valentina Zharkova noted that we are coming up to a harmonic that looks to be quite similar to previous "mini ice ages." Generally these periods of weaker magnetic fields leave the jet streams all wobbly wobbly because they aren't quite "held in place" as much by normal high strength field.
Combine that with the weather warfare and climate hacking shenanigans...
And lots of redneck cow farts... so bad for climate and so smelly
yeah that part is BS they try and use to push their insider trading on the "green agenda" and such, hah
The point about cosmic rays is that they can, after the fashion of a cloud chamber, induce the formation of water droplets, thus helping cloud formation. More clouds means a higher albedo (reflectivity), which results in lower insolation (Earth surface warming from the Sun).
"Weather warfare" and "climate hacking" are orders of magnitude less significant.
Activists are going to have a hard time readjusting to the idea of seasons because they look a lot like climate change to people with little to no short-term memory
Are you saying it's not caused by Putin and racism?
I thought it was caused by the need for control of the people.
Climate change is caused by the desire for unrestrained funding.
None of this matters as long as we keep collectively allowing the absolute wrong people to be elected and appointed to positions of power.
[they] ONLY hold sway over the population because the population allows it.
Man made climate change is real but it’s not coming from gas stoves and cows. Ask Darpa
I.e., it's not coming.
Article by Douglas J. Cotton, a bit of a crank. Sort of ironically humorous for a crank to be criticizing a scam. The reference to Claes Johnson is also crank science, who doesn't understand the radiant transfer mechanisms in the atmosphere. And why would I? Because i was working for years on weapon systems that projected megawatt-level beams of infrared radiation through the atmosphere. We had to know what was going on. But it is true that the NASA diagram is a hoot, so what are we to do?
The short story is that the greenhouse effect exists, is benign, and is already maxxed-out. The presence of greenhouse gases results only in the scattering of the thermal radiation given off by the Earth. Nearly all of it (~85%) is scattered, with some going straight through the atmosphere and the scattered component resulting in half returning to Earth's surface and half going to space. The portion returning to Earth adds to the solar radiation and causes the Earth surface temperature to be higher than it would be without the scattering. About 55 C warmer, so we should be glad of it. But the worst it can be is for 100% to be scattered, which is not in the cards, due to details of the absorption spectrum. Even so, moving to 100% would mean a temperature shift of only a few degrees C, and that would be the end of it. (You can't make a random process more random.) And for CO2? Radiometric modeling results show that the spectral gap in water vapor that is filled by CO2 is essentially filled at a concentration level of 100 ppm. Beyond that, it makes no difference. We are at 400 ppm. If it ever got as low as 200 ppm, the vegetation would die (CO2 is plant food) and all life would follow suit.