El cambio climático: ¿un bulo científico?

[Isocrates]

Bueno, ante el cariño que Manel me muestra es sus últimos mensajes voy a corresponderle como haría un amigo. Por desgracia, sigo si tener suficiente tiempo para hacerlo como un amigo se merece, pero procuraré ir “poco a poco”


Recordaras que te dije

Señores, permítanme presentarles como perito de parte –de la mía- al Dr. Svensmark.
Este afamado científico considera que la tierra se ha estado calentando durante los últimos años, que ese calentamiento está probado por los datos tantas veces discutidos… y cree haber encontrado la causa del mismo. Por cierto, ha utilizado un modelo para realizar sus predicciones.

A lo que me dijiste…

Pues si me corresponde ser la fiscalía ante este inesperado dislate peonil, sea. Isocrates, hasta el cuello. La pata, digo. Este afamado científico no considera que la tierra se haya estado calentando durante los últimos años —procura falsarlo con su modelo—, no considera probado ese calentamiento por los datos tantas veces discutidos —eso ya lo tiene falsado— y cree haber encontrado la causa de la fluctuación de las temperaturas troposféricas, no SAT, en la interacción entre rayos cósmicos, nubes y sol. Te habrás quedado a gusto con este arranque peonil, pero habrá un momento Bermúdez de un momento a otro XDDDDDD

Como siempre, los momentos Bermúdez, con pruebas.

Lo primero, un breve resumen enlazado en una de las páginas que proporcionaste



http://www.junkscience.com/Greenhouse/Ge...limate.pdf

It is known that low-altitude clouds have an overall cooling effect on the Earth’s surface. Hence, variations in cloud cover caused by cosmic rays can change the surface temperature. The existence of such a cosmic connection to the Earth’s climate might thus help to explain past and present variations in the Earth’s climate. Interestingly, during the 20th Century, the Sun’s magnetic field (which shields Earth from cosmic rays) more than doubled, thereby reducing the average influx of cosmic rays. The resulting reduction in cloudiness, especially of low-altitude clouds, may be a significant factor in the global warming Earth has undergone during the last century.

No sé, Manel, aclarame qué quiere decir eso de...


It is known that low-altitude clouds have an overall cooling effect on the Earth’s surface. Hence, variations in cloud cover caused by cosmic rays can change the surface temperature.

y

The resulting reduction in cloudiness, especially of low-altitude clouds, may be a significant factor in the global warming Earth has undergone during the last century.


Pero claro, esto no es mas que una breve reseña y puede haber interpretado incorrectamente el trabajo de Svensmark así que... ¿Qué dice el propio Svensmark”?


http://discovermagazine.com/2007/jul/the...-svensmark

In 1996, when you reported that changes in the sun’s activity could explain most or all of the recent rise in Earth’s temperature, the chairman of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel called your announcement “extremely naive and irresponsible.” How did you react?

I was just stunned. I remember being shocked by how many thought what I was doing was terrible. I couldn’t understand it because when you are a physicist, you are trained that when you find something that cannot be explained, something that doesn’t fit, that is what you are excited about. If there is a possibility that you might have an explanation, that is something that everybody thinks is what you should pursue. Here was exactly the opposite reaction. It was as though people were saying to me, “This is something that you should not have done.” That was very strange for me, and it has been more or less like that ever since.




What first made you suspect that changes in the sun are having a significant impact on global warming?

I began my investigations by studying work done in 1991 by Eigil Fiin-Christensen and Knud Lassen Fiin-Christensen. They had looked at solar activity over the last 100 years and found a remarkable correlation to temperatures. I knew that many people dismissed that result, but I thought the correlation was so good that I could not help but start speculating—what could be the relation? Then I heard a suggestion that it might be cosmic rays, changing the chemistry high up in the atmosphere. I immediately thought, “Well, if that is going to work, it has to be through the clouds.”
That was the initial idea. Then I remembered seeing a science experiment at my high school in Elsinore, in which our teacher showed us what is called a cloud chamber, and seeing tracks of radioactive particles, which look like small droplets. So I thought to myself, “That would be the way to do it.” I started to obtain data from satellites, which actually was quite a detective work at that time, but I did start to find data, and to my surprise there seems to be a correlation between changes in cosmic rays and changes in clouds. And I think in early January 1996, I finally got a curve, which was very impressive with respect to the correlation. It was only over a short period of time, because the data were covering just seven years or something like that. So it was almost nothing, but it was a nice correlation.


How exactly does the mechanism work, linking changes in the sun with climate change on Earth?

The basic idea is that solar activity can turn the cloudiness up and down, which has an effect on the warming or cooling of Earth’s surface temperature. The key agents in this are cosmic rays, which are energetic particles coming from the interstellar media—they come from remnants of supernova explosions mainly. These energetic particles have to enter into what we call the heliosphere, which is the large volume of space that is dominated by our sun, through the solar wind, which is a plasma of electrons, atomic nuclei, and associated magnetic fields that are streaming nonstop from the sun. Cosmic-ray particles have to penetrate the sun’s magnetic field. And if the sun and the solar wind are very active—as they are right now—they will not allow so many cosmic rays to reach Earth. Fewer cosmic rays mean fewer clouds will be formed, and so there will be a warmer Earth. If the sun and the solar wind are not so active, then more cosmic rays can come in. That means more clouds [reflecting away more sunlight] and a cooler Earth.
Now it’s well known that solar activity can turn up and down the amount of cosmic rays that come to Earth. But the next question was a complete unknown: Why should cosmic rays affect clouds? Because at that time, when we began this work, there was no mechanism that could explain this. Meteorologists denied that cosmic rays could be involved in cloud formation.

Al parecer, el afamado científico sí considera que la tierra se ha estado calentando –y así lo indica él expresa y claramente-; su modelo no falsa el calentamiento, sino que le atribuye una causa distinta a la humana y, por supuesto, la influencia solar afecta a la temperatura de la superficie de la tierra.

Uno de los dos mantenía que que el trabajo de Svensmark señalaba eso y el otro decía que no, y que el primero hablaba sin saber.

"Dislate peonil"
"Metedura de pata hasta el cuello"

Efectivamente.