RE: [biofuel] Question - efficiency of sunlight conversion....Carbon Forcing or solar activity
Have you read 'The Manic Sun- Weather Theories Confounded' by Nigel calder, who concludes that our weather is at the mercy of exploding stars in the milky way combined with solar activity. Following my IT instruction on the biofuel list I will cut and paste a resume GLOBAL WARMING CARBON FORCING OR SOLAR ACTIVITY ??! See The Manic Sun - Weather Theories Confounded By Nigel Calder 1997, Pilkington Press, ISBN 1 899044 1 1 6 The Author: Made reputation by spotting scientific revolutions as they occur. Responsible for TV programmes: - Violent Universe, Restless Earth, The Life Game, etc etc. Has tracked the debate between Solar or Greenhouse warming for more than 20 years. A reputable independent reporter of science. The author cautions: - Critics beware, your reactions may provide material for a later edition... This book records the scientific study of global warming and the developing understanding of the mechanisms which affect it. It particularly follows the development of the Greenhouse theory or Carbon Forcing and views this in relation to the study of solar impact on global weather. The mechanisms by which varying solar electro-magnetic activities affects global weather was discovered by 3 Danish scientists, Knud Lassen, Eigil Friis-Christensen and Henrik Svensmark using: - 1. Their own work on the Earth's magnetic field and solar activity. 2. Data from other research scientists on cosmic rays, solar studies, temperature and weather records, magnetic fields, the mechanisms of cloud formation, el nino and volcanic effects and much newer data available from solar and earth observing satellites. They found that: - 1. The Earth is washed by a magnetic shield and solar wind from the sun, which vary in intensity with the suns own electromagnetic flares and sunspot activity The stronger the activity on and in the sun, the stronger the solar wind and magnetic shield. 2. The Earth is constantly bombarded by cosmic rays from the Milky Way. 3. The effect of cosmic rays is to charge atmospheric particles with the result that clouds form more easily. 4. Cosmic rays are drawn to the Earth's poles by the Earth's magnetic field. They are therefore concentrated in middle to pole latitudes and assist the formation of more clouds in middle latitudes. 5. Clouds actually cool the Earth by preventing the sun's heat from reaching it. 6. But, the effect of both the solar wind and solar magnetic shield is to turn away from the Earth the bombardment of cosmic rays - thus less cloud formation and greater solar heat impinges on Earth, thus warming it. Using cosmic ray data (radio beryllium deposits in Greenland ice cores) from 1885 and comparing them with IPCC temperature data they can demonstrate that the global land temperature simply follows (to within 0.2oc) the intensity of cosmic rays. Variations are explained by prolonged el nino effects and volcanic eruptions. In addition, the empirical indicator of solar vigour, the length of the solar cycle, matches climate change back to 1500, i.e. before the industrial revolution and our use of fossil fuels leading to the carbon forcing theory. The author criticises the IPCC super computers for not taking enough regard of: 1. Solar and cosmic ray activity 2. Cloud thickness and its cooling effect 3. The effects of mid ocean cloud formation of which little was known until reasonably recently (satellite pictures and surface studies) Bert Bolin, Swedish deputy for the IPCC, firstly discredited the Danish Scientists work and is quoted in information as saying I find the move from this pair scientifically extremely nave and irresponsible. But a few weeks later, after reading the Svensmark and Friis-Christensen pre-print, he is quoted in the Swedish magazine Ny Teknik as saying..it is pleasing to see such a sane and sincere scientific investigation. It differs quite a lot from other questionings of the greenhouse effect. Naturally, I was surprised by the big changes they report in the clouds I can't see that their findings are given a satisfactory explanation. They do not conclude anything about the effects of human activity. But there is no doubt that this is serious science. Despite virtually disproving the carbon forcing theory the book does caution that it is wise to continue with more efficient energy use and renewable sources for reasons of protecting limited resources and tackling acid rain, pollution and air quality issues. The Danish scientists' work was published on 18 July 1996 but media attention focused on the Boeing 747, which crashed into the sea off Long Island. So, unless these theories can be contradicted, it seems that global weather is at the mercy of our sun's magnetic activity and exploding stars in the Milky Way - the source of cosmic rays. Don Johnston Environmental Coordinator , Portsmouth City Council
RE: [biofuel] Question - efficiency of sunlight conversion....Carbon Forcing or solar activity
I think meteoric activity is in there as well sice it is the doping of the photosphere that makes a difference. Plasmas emit photons roughly proportional to the square of the number of electrons of the atom making up the plasma. Iron has 55 so it has much more emission than hydrogen with 1. So you see a little iron goes a long way in modifying solar emission. Kirk Johnston, Don [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Have you read 'The Manic Sun- Weather Theories Confounded' by Nigel calder, who concludes that our weather is at the mercy of exploding stars in the milky way combined with solar activity. Following my IT instruction on the biofuel list I will cut and paste a resume GLOBAL WARMING CARBON FORCING OR SOLAR ACTIVITY ??! See The Manic Sun - Weather Theories Confounded By Nigel Calder 1997, Pilkington Press, ISBN 1 899044 1 1 6 The Author: Made reputation by spotting scientific revolutions as they occur. Responsible for TV programmes: - Violent Universe, Restless Earth, The Life Game, etc etc. Has tracked the debate between Solar or Greenhouse warming for more than 20 years. A reputable independent reporter of science. The author cautions: - Critics beware, your reactions may provide material for a later edition... This book records the scientific study of global warming and the developing understanding of the mechanisms which affect it. It particularly follows the development of the Greenhouse theory or Carbon Forcing and views this in relation to the study of solar impact on global weather. The mechanisms by which varying solar electro-magnetic activities affects global weather was discovered by 3 Danish scientists, Knud Lassen, Eigil Friis-Christensen and Henrik Svensmark using: - 1. Their own work on the Earth's magnetic field and solar activity. 2. Data from other research scientists on cosmic rays, solar studies, temperature and weather records, magnetic fields, the mechanisms of cloud formation, el nino and volcanic effects and much newer data available from solar and earth observing satellites. They found that: - 1. The Earth is washed by a magnetic shield and solar wind from the sun, which vary in intensity with the suns own electromagnetic flares and sunspot activity The stronger the activity on and in the sun, the stronger the solar wind and magnetic shield. 2. The Earth is constantly bombarded by cosmic rays from the Milky Way. 3. The effect of cosmic rays is to charge atmospheric particles with the result that clouds form more easily. 4. Cosmic rays are drawn to the Earth's poles by the Earth's magnetic field. They are therefore concentrated in middle to pole latitudes and assist the formation of more clouds in middle latitudes. 5. Clouds actually cool the Earth by preventing the sun's heat from reaching it. 6. But, the effect of both the solar wind and solar magnetic shield is to turn away from the Earth the bombardment of cosmic rays - thus less cloud formation and greater solar heat impinges on Earth, thus warming it. Using cosmic ray data (radio beryllium deposits in Greenland ice cores) from 1885 and comparing them with IPCC temperature data they can demonstrate that the global land temperature simply follows (to within 0.2oc) the intensity of cosmic rays. Variations are explained by prolonged el nino effects and volcanic eruptions. In addition, the empirical indicator of solar vigour, the length of the solar cycle, matches climate change back to 1500, i.e. before the industrial revolution and our use of fossil fuels leading to the carbon forcing theory. The author criticises the IPCC super computers for not taking enough regard of: 1. Solar and cosmic ray activity 2. Cloud thickness and its cooling effect 3. The effects of mid ocean cloud formation of which little was known until reasonably recently (satellite pictures and surface studies) Bert Bolin, Swedish deputy for the IPCC, firstly discredited the Danish Scientists work and is quoted in information as saying I find the move from this pair scientifically extremely naïve and irresponsible. But a few weeks later, after reading the Svensmark and Friis-Christensen pre-print, he is quoted in the Swedish magazine Ny Teknik as saying..it is pleasing to see such a sane and sincere scientific investigation. It differs quite a lot from other questionings of the greenhouse effect. Naturally, I was surprised by the big changes they report in the clouds I can't see that their findings are given a satisfactory explanation. They do not conclude anything about the effects of human activity. But there is no doubt that this is serious science. Despite virtually disproving the carbon forcing theory the book does caution that it is wise to continue with more efficient energy use and renewable sources for reasons of protecting limited resources and tackling acid rain, pollution and air quality issues. The Danish scientists' work was published on 18 July 1996 but
RE: [biofuel] Question - efficiency of sunlight conversion....Carbon Forcing or solar activity
Kirk, apologies , but that was way over my head! I did however understand the 'Manic Sun', and the three Danish Scientists made no mention of meteors. Don Johnston Environmental Coordinator , Portsmouth City Council Chair, Solent Energy and Environment Management Group Winner ; National Champion-Science and Technology, Green Apple Awards 2002 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel: 023 9283 4247 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Kirk McLoren Sent: 12 October 2004 15:22 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [biofuel] Question - efficiency of sunlight conversionCarbon Forcing or solar activity I think meteoric activity is in there as well sice it is the doping of the photosphere that makes a difference. Plasmas emit photons roughly proportional to the square of the number of electrons of the atom making up the plasma. Iron has 55 so it has much more emission than hydrogen with 1. So you see a little iron goes a long way in modifying solar emission. Kirk Johnston, Don [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Have you read 'The Manic Sun- Weather Theories Confounded' by Nigel calder, who concludes that our weather is at the mercy of exploding stars in the milky way combined with solar activity. Following my IT instruction on the biofuel list I will cut and paste a resume GLOBAL WARMING CARBON FORCING OR SOLAR ACTIVITY ??! See The Manic Sun - Weather Theories Confounded By Nigel Calder 1997, Pilkington Press, ISBN 1 899044 1 1 6 The Author: Made reputation by spotting scientific revolutions as they occur. Responsible for TV programmes: - Violent Universe, Restless Earth, The Life Game, etc etc. Has tracked the debate between Solar or Greenhouse warming for more than 20 years. A reputable independent reporter of science. The author cautions: - Critics beware, your reactions may provide material for a later edition... This book records the scientific study of global warming and the developing understanding of the mechanisms which affect it. It particularly follows the development of the Greenhouse theory or Carbon Forcing and views this in relation to the study of solar impact on global weather. The mechanisms by which varying solar electro-magnetic activities affects global weather was discovered by 3 Danish scientists, Knud Lassen, Eigil Friis-Christensen and Henrik Svensmark using: - 1. Their own work on the Earth's magnetic field and solar activity. 2. Data from other research scientists on cosmic rays, solar studies, temperature and weather records, magnetic fields, the mechanisms of cloud formation, el nino and volcanic effects and much newer data available from solar and earth observing satellites. They found that: - 1. The Earth is washed by a magnetic shield and solar wind from the sun, which vary in intensity with the suns own electromagnetic flares and sunspot activity The stronger the activity on and in the sun, the stronger the solar wind and magnetic shield. 2. The Earth is constantly bombarded by cosmic rays from the Milky Way. 3. The effect of cosmic rays is to charge atmospheric particles with the result that clouds form more easily. 4. Cosmic rays are drawn to the Earth's poles by the Earth's magnetic field. They are therefore concentrated in middle to pole latitudes and assist the formation of more clouds in middle latitudes. 5. Clouds actually cool the Earth by preventing the sun's heat from reaching it. 6. But, the effect of both the solar wind and solar magnetic shield is to turn away from the Earth the bombardment of cosmic rays - thus less cloud formation and greater solar heat impinges on Earth, thus warming it. Using cosmic ray data (radio beryllium deposits in Greenland ice cores) from 1885 and comparing them with IPCC temperature data they can demonstrate that the global land temperature simply follows (to within 0.2oc) the intensity of cosmic rays. Variations are explained by prolonged el nino effects and volcanic eruptions. In addition, the empirical indicator of solar vigour, the length of the solar cycle, matches climate change back to 1500, i.e. before the industrial revolution and our use of fossil fuels leading to the carbon forcing theory. The author criticises the IPCC super computers for not taking enough regard of: 1. Solar and cosmic ray activity 2. Cloud thickness and its cooling effect 3. The effects of mid ocean cloud formation of which little was known until reasonably recently (satellite pictures and surface studies) Bert Bolin, Swedish deputy for the IPCC, firstly discredited the Danish Scientists work and is quoted in information as saying I find the move from this pair scientifically extremely nave and irresponsible. But a few weeks later, after reading the Svensmark and Friis-Christensen pre-print, he is quoted in the Swedish magazine Ny Teknik as saying..it is pleasing to see such a sane and sincere scientific
