global warming ? Sterns vs Landsheit


I watched the recent UK channel 4 programme trying to repudiate the hypothesis stating that man was responsible for global warming , and was frankly fascinated with part of the discussion.
Amongst quite a lot of dross and scaremongering were a few star items.
Firstly there was a presumption that global warming was a direct function of the sun's activity .
A minor argument for this is that the sun is by far the major factor in the earth not freezing , never mind warming ! The major argument , however, is that there is a close correlation between sunspot activity/solar flux and the earth's temperature [Dr Landsheit et al] . {see graph}
As I understand it [ being hopelessly out of date with statistical analysis] , there is a close correlation here up till the start of 1900, when the correlation starts to break down and after 1950 other factors seem to be coming to the fore. This was also mentioned in The Sterns report which agreed that the above was very likely true up to 1950 as well.
Secondly , the historical data shows that higher CO2 levels are associated with higher temperatures, but there appears to be a time lag of about 800 years , ie higher temperatures bring about higher CO2 atmospheric levels , probably due to rising sea temperatures reducing the solubility of CO2 in water. There is a heat balance mentioned in the Sterns report that effectively repudiates this fact , however.
Thirdly , and possibly the most interesting , that the rise in temperature in the troposphere which would prove global warming vis a vis greenhouse gases hasn't occurred .
If we look at the solar flux graph , it is evident that the solar flux is at a 150 year maximum at the moment and shows of sign of decreasing , in fact it appears to be on a parabolic rise , and whether or not greenhouse gases were responsible for global warming , historically we should be experiencing a much higher temperature , which is what we are ,of course, finding , but putting it in a single context of CO2 levels.
The headline aspects of global warming [ for whichever reason] are that at a certain point in time, the warming becomes self reinforcing and a runaway system can develop , and proof exists in the historical data.
I am not qualified to state any conclusions, but I believe The Stern's Review has to be taken seriously , but with the caveat of other natural phenomenom possibly overriding the background man made warming taking place .
My worry is that the rise in sunspot activity is possibly down to mankind. Is it merely coincidence that the present rise in solar flux starts its exponential rise at about 1900AD , drops during the second world war , and then proceeds it's rise thereafter
No , its not a conspiracy theory , but does equate with the rise in radio frequency emissions from the earth . Apparently we are now emitting as much radio waves as from a small star. How this affects fusion , I don't know , but I'd like someone to lay this one to rest and disprove it .

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Moskva and Neptune Missiles

Image
 Don't know about you but I was wondering about this ship sinking and how it happened ...  The hard info [below] can be found by search .  Anyhow, it's a lorry launched [air] system developed from a Russian design and designed to knock out ships up to 5000 tonnes . Moskva was 15,000, but got hit twice.  The ship was designed to protect other vessels from incoming missiles . It looks like it might have been targeted to allow for future hits maybe ?  The strategy was to hassle the defences with drones , and then launch whilst distracted , and was rather successful ,, hitting a loaded missile tube [ apparently ] thereby multiplying its destructive power . This and other aspects of Ukraine defence certainly look and feel like intelligent warfare, by far better than in 2014 , when Russia first attacked . One tidbit I recall reading was a few weeks  before the start of the war and stated that Ukraine defences were much better now than in 2014, [they said] primari...
Read more

Herd Immunity explained for Dummies

Image
Well I don't know about you , but herd immunity is a bit like, we all know what it is , 'cos we've been told - So it's easy like ????? its about 90% innit ? So far, so good. A standard definition is the amount that would stop an infection getting out of control, in that for every person infected, they, in turn , would infect [ on average] no more than one other person . For this reason epidemiologists often quote the reinfection rate for clarity. Coronavirus is 2.4 , ie for every person getting it, on average 2.4 people get it from that person [ assuming no other situations affect this] . Let's take a reinfection of 1.00 for simplicity,ie for every person catching it, they reinfect another person. So for a family of 4 , one person gets it- 1-2 family members catch it ..... Wrong.... this is about statistics [ long word, so just call it odds if you know a little about betting] . If one family member gets it, it becomes likely that the entire family may well su...
Read more
Briefing By Boris Johnson 20/4/21 This was a strange briefing. Normally Boris comes to deliver good news or put a gloss on bad [ at the start of the 1st lockdown was the only 1 I recall as it happens] .  This time , we had a briefing saying people should get vaccinated , and nothing else ; primarily by his GP sidekick . The nothing else bit was emphasised by Boris forgetting about the mandatory graphs and needed to be reminded at the time . In short, a bit of a mess saying nothing . Remembering that briefings were only going to be public for important things , which this categorically did NOT qualify . Finally the length was much shorter than others .  It is barely possible that HMG was trying to get UK vaccination rate above the 85+% ? it's already achieving and someone managed to persuade Boris to forget his normal reticence of staying in the foreground and delivering what to him would be something below his attention span , but does seem very unlikely. If one looks at the n...
Read more