kell553 wrote:
Unfortunately Mr. Black has based his argument on a pretty spectacular flaw. The sun is NOT the source of the cosmic rays. It is the suns increased activity (and stronger magnetic field during the past few energetic cycles) that keeps cosmic rays from deep space away. Once the sun goes into a quiet period (which it now has over this past year) the suns field will weaken and then allow the extra solar radiation to hit the earth.
Note this:
He showed that over the last 20 years, solar activity has been rising, which should have led to a drop in global temperatures if the theory was correct.
Again, the stronger activity keeps the Cosmic radiation away. It is NOT the source. So according to the actual theory a stronger solar output will
a. Warm up the earth due to increased Solar heating.
b. Prevent cosmic rays from reaching the earth to create the cooling cloud cover.
Lockwood's error is so fundamentally wrong it leaves the impression he is intentionally misstating it knowing a reporter would have no clue and would print it as gospel.
YES: I am calling Lockwood a liar.
(EDIT) If you look in the articles second section, paras 4, 5, and 6; it clearly states what Svenmark's theory says. Lockwood gets it backward and the reporter never catches it.
Also note the way they have treated an opposing theory:
We started on this game
The IPCC has got it right, so we had better carry on
as far as we can see, he has no reason to challenge the IPCC
So we had better carry on trying to cut carbon emissions
So, they intentionally misquoted the actual theory. Then they proclaim their research disproves it, while providing no evidence of that research. Then we have the insistence that of course they are correct so we have to get on the carbon band wagon.
It strains their credibility to the point of disbelief.
concur. Mr. Black essentially misrepresented what the theory is, and then argued against that fabrication. Focusing on just the past 20 years is also a
red flag - during one period of high solar activity he tries to find the wrong link and therefore claims the theory which looks back over hundreds of thousands
of years is flawed.
Just another propaganda stunt while Svenmark is still working on research to validate his theory. As Kell pointed out, he completely reversed the theory and
the idiot reporter, his editor, his readers, and the rest of the Propaganda Press and Corrupt Scientists in the AGW Church are all to stupid to catch it. Kell
and I both saw through it in 30 seconds.
Here is a news flash. The cycle is down. Cycle 24 has had one (1) sunspot and is not about a year late. Several Cycle 23 sunspots just came and went which
is not particularly unusual - sunspots generally overlap between cycles. But the key is that Cycle 24 is still dormant. The Solar Theories (several) hold
that this will result in lower temperatures. And.... Temperatures are falling and have been for over a year now- not rising. In fact, with the exception of
the Dec06Jan07 El Nino spike - the temperatures have been FALLING for THREE YEARS on global scale.
The temperatures being reported by all of the climate reporting centers around the world are, in fact, validating the solar theories and providing a solid
validation of Svenmark's theory.
nice (not!) try. The AGW crowed is Intellectually Bankrupt as usual.
sorry, trolls.
