Cosmic rays blamed for global warming.

It is about a book due to be published this week that is the result of a 5 year research project. I can produce some other facts too such as a graphic showing solar activity as read from ice core proxies (basically, solar activity causes subtle changes in the relationship of various isotopes that make up water and trapped air inside polar ice) tracking almost perfectly with temperature proxy data.

Might also explain the “global warming” that is also currently taking place on other planets in the solar system besides earth too.

But a warning: You will now be targeted by the Grand Inqisitor, perhaps with help from Roberty Byrd, the former Exalted Cyclops.

First, they will attack your understanding of the information.

Next, they will attack those who wrote the studies.

Third, they will bury you in tangential, often unrelated information to confuse you.

And should you dare to respond, every word you type will be parsed in a way that would make the master of “depends on the meaning of the word ‘is’” proud.

Global Warming is one area of discussion in which no dissenting research or opinions are permitted.

I just wish that Ellen Goodman viewed this obviously political movement with the same skepticism she applied to the pre-war intelligence on Iraq.

But of course her skepticism then, like her unquestioning acceptance now are all based on her ideological foundation.

Meanwhile, Nancy Pelosi’s flying around in a plane ten times the size of the one Hastert (who weighed considerably more than Pelosi) flew.

The motive behind global warming fearmongering is POWER, not concern for the environment.

A couple of key grafs:

It has commonly been assumed that the rate of growth of greenhouse gases is continuing to accelerate. That may appear to be a plausible assumption, as the world’s population continues to increase each year. Global energy use, the primary source of these gases, also continues to increase. Thus climate scenarios have been dominated by the “business as usual” scenario in which the annual increment of greenhouse gas climate forcing continues to get larger and larger, leading to a specter of imminent climate disaster.

…

In reality, although greenhouse gases continue to increase, the growth rate has slowed to about 3 W/m2 per century. A big factor has been the phase-out of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), which was accomplished by cooperative international actions. The growth rate of methane (CH4) has fallen by two-thirds, at least in part due to slowing of the growth of sources. The growth rate of CO2 flattened out in the past 25 years, as the rate of growth of fossil fuel use declined from 4% per year to about 1% per year.

There is a good graphic in that paper too that will never see the light either.

That article is based on a NASA paper with the following abstract:

Hansen, J., Mki. Sato, R. Ruedy, A. Lacis, and V. Oinas 2000.

Global warming in the twenty-first century: An alternative scenario.

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 97, 9875-9880, doi:10.1073/pnas.170278997.

A common view is that the current global warming rate will continue or accelerate. But we argue that rapid warming in recent decades has been driven mainly by non-CO2 greenhouse gases (GHGs), such as chlorofluorocarbons, CH4, and N2O, not by the products of fossil fuel burning, CO2 and aerosols, the positive and negative climate forcings of which are partially offsetting. The growth rate of non-CO2 GHGs has declined in the past decade. If sources of CH4 and O3 precursors were reduced in the future, the change in climate forcing by non-CO2 GHGs in the next 50 years could be near zero. Combined with a reduction of black carbon emissions and plausible success in slowing CO2 emissions, this reduction of non-CO2 GHGs could lead to a decline in the rate of global warming, reducing the danger of dramatic climate change. Such a focus on air pollution has practical benefits that unite the interests of developed and developing countries. However, assessment of ongoing and future climate change requires composition-specific long-term global monitoring of aerosol properties.

You can download the document from here at the Goddard Institute for Space Studies

This poster shows that sea level rise has been fairly constant over the past century and has actually leveled off on the past 10 years or so:

Here is a link to a poster in PDF format that gives the gist of the conclusions reached in this research paper which can be purchased online. The abstract of the paper follows:

Nine long and nearly continuous sea level records were chosen from around the world to explore rates of change in sea level for 1904—2003. These records were found to capture the variability found in a larger number of stations over the last half century studied previously. Extending the sea level record back over the entire century suggests that the high variability in the rates of sea level change observed over the past 20 years were not particularly unusual. The rate of sea level change was found to be larger in the early part of last century (2.03 ± 0.35 mm/yr 1904—1953), in comparison with the latter part (1.45 ± 0.34 mm/yr 1954—2003). The highest decadal rate of rise occurred in the decade centred on 1980 (5.31 mm/yr) with the lowest rate of rise occurring in the decade centred on 1964 (−1.49 mm/yr). Over the entire century the mean rate of change was 1.74 ± 0.16 mm/yr.

The graph in the PDF poster given in the first link shows what looks like a leveling off to slight drop in sea levels at the same time that “hockey stick” believes at the UN are projecting runaway rise.