A recent paper published in Environmental Research Letters (PDF) supports the cosmic ray :: climate change hypothesis. According to the study, the sun’s influence on climate may be as much as 10X stronger than previously believed.
The new paper expands what is known about how low solar activity cycles allow galactic cosmic rays to penetrate Earth’s atmosphere and facilitate increased cloud cover. Denser cloud cover reflects solar heat away from Earth, cooling the planet. More
The new paper suggest that changes in the quantity of cloud condensation nuclei (CCN) are caused by changes in the cosmic ray flux:
The impact of solar variations on particle formation and cloud condensation nuclei (CCN), a critical step for one of the possible solar indirect climate forcing pathways, is studied here with a global aerosol model optimized for simulating detailed particle formation and growth processes. The effect of temperature change in enhancing the solar cycle CCN signal is investigated for the first time…
We can clearly see above that climate model projections are rapidly diverging from actual real world observations. Perhaps that is because the computer models used the wrong assumptions. If they gave far more weight to solar fluxuations and far less weight to greenhouse gases, the predictions might better match the reality. And then we might discover that there is no “tipping point,” and that anthropogenic CO2 is not the demon gas the IPCC, Obama, and the Gore /Hansen /Mann cabal claim that it is.
If anthropogenic CO2 is not the driver of climate change, then what is the point of Europe’s green energy suicide? Why is Obama’s EPA attacking US fossil fuels production? Why are governments around the world subsidising the intermittent unreliable forms of energy — big wind and big solar — at the expense of more reliable energy production from safer, cleaner new nuclear plants, coal, oil sands, gas, and other abundant carbonaceous energy sources?
Image Source: http://www.thegwpf.org/19310/
Until 2010 the gas prices in Europe and the USA were pretty similar, tracking each other up and down. Post 2010, the difference is startling!
Why does this matter? Well, we use gas for a lot of things, not just electricity generation. For example, natural gas is required as feedstock for many industrial processes, especially the manufacture of the petrochemicals and plastics that modern life, and even anti-fracking campaigners, require.
The cost of this feedstock is a major driver in the final cost of these products, and hence the viability of the industries that make and use them. __ http://www.thegwpf.org/19310/
Europe sits quavering under the threat of a Russian energy shutoff, while abundant energy sources wait to be exploited. Politically driven fear of nuclear energy and unwarranted fear of anthropogenic carbon are pushing Europe into energy starvation, and costing Europe’s low income energy consumers dearly. Obama wants to drive the US in the same dysfunctional direction as Europe has chosen.
Clearly we are seeing a gross malfeasance of leadership, on both sides of the Atlantic. It makes no difference whether the ideological biases driving this malfeasance are based on good intentions. The catastrophic forces of energy scarcity and economic hardship that are building beneath the populations of Europe and the US cannot be reasoned with, using the junior high school debating tactics of today’s leaders.
Ordinarily this would be the time for the grownups to take charge. But where are the grownups? Is this massive failure of rationality an early indicator for the coming dysgenic idiocracy?
HFTB. PFTW. It is never too late to have a dangerous childhood.
Consider how you might start to build the nucleus of a resilient community of Dangerous Children.