Project Astrometria:Global Cooling until 2100?

[Reality Check]

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/10/29/corbyn/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/18/weatheraction_storm_ok/

More press interviews of Piers Corbyn.
They are totally useless as far as the science is concerned. I could give you just as many press stories about the "successes" of psychics - that does not make their claims about their accuracy plausible.

If you want to give Piers Corbyn the same status as psychics then please continue to quote press stories about him !

 

[Haig]

More press interviews of Piers Corbyn.
They are totally useless as far as the science is concerned. I could give you just as many press stories about the "successes" of psychics - that does not make their claims about their accuracy plausible.

If you want to give Piers Corbyn the same status as psychics then please continue to quote press stories about him !

I’m at work just now so I need to be brief.

The OP started with Project Astrometria and the Russians view that the Sun is the main driver of climate change and that they expect global cooling from now on for a few decades.

I brought in Piers Corbyn and his SWT because his ideas support the above.

So, the ad-hom’s begin, the AGW people don’t like his “message” and attack the “man” This is a typical and I feel,distasteful tactic in this debate.

All I’m doing is giving those people (of a less biased attitude) a chance to see the attempted smears and misinformation for what they are.

Here is another chance to see PC, in another light, in his video bio blog. He comes across to me as an honest, straight talking guy.

Piers Corbyn - Video Bio Blog

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5jRVNqK4dt8

 

[ben m]

I brought in Piers Corbyn and his SWT because his ideas support the above.

So, the ad-hom’s begin, the AGW people don’t like his “message” and attack the “man” This is a typical and I feel,distasteful tactic in this debate.

My response to Astrometria was the numbers don't work---that "space weather" carries a billion times less energy flux than TSI---and your response was along the lines of "I don't need to look twice at your bullying numbers because I have the great Piers Corbyn on my side"

 

[Dancing David]

I’m at work just now so I need to be brief.

The OP started with Project Astrometria and the Russians view that the Sun is the main driver of climate change and that they expect global cooling from now on for a few decades.

I brought in Piers Corbyn and his SWT because his ideas support the above.

So, the ad-hom’s begin, the AGW people don’t like his “message” and attack the “man” This is a typical and I feel,distasteful tactic in this debate.

All I’m doing is giving those people (of a less biased attitude) a chance to see the attempted smears and misinformation for what they are.

Here is another chance to see PC, in another light, in his video bio blog. He comes across to me as an honest, straight talking guy.

Piers Corbyn - Video Bio Blog

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5jRVNqK4dt8

I would say that you have ignored some of the arguments about the theory you have presented and have mischaracterized much of the discussion.

 

[Haig]

My response to Astrometria was the numbers don't work---that "space weather" carries a billion times less energy flux than TSI---and your response was along the lines of "I don't need to look twice at your bullying numbers because I have the great Piers Corbyn on my side"

I don’t think your right. The “space weather” can’t, IMHO, be dismissed so lightly. This 93 million mile long magnetic rope connecting the Sun and Earth along with the million miles an hour solar wind are key.

Yes, I am impressed by these facts, aren’t you? NASA are puzzled too, a portal, the size of the Earth, opens every 8 mins above our heads, day and night. They don’t understand how or why these magnetic ropes (FTE’s) stay as a cohesive entity all that distance. The solar wind can virtually stop for days and they don’t know why? PC uses measurements of the solar wind and magnetic events on the Sun to do his stuff. I don’t really have sides, it’s just that his and the Russians theories, tell me the science isn’t settled.

So, your math, (I’m sure you have done it right) aren’t the “deal buster” you think it is. We all remember who the Wright Bros were and what they did.

We don’t care, now, about the mathematician who “proved” it couldn’t be done.

I would say that you have ignored some of the arguments about the theory you have presented and have mischaracterized much of the discussion.

I have still to respond to posts on page three and I will get around to them. If you think some of the arguments before that are really vital to this debate and I have side stepped them unfairly, please point them out, or restate them. And I will give a response in my next big post.

Maybe I have “mischaracterized much of the discussion” I’m sorry if you think that, it wasn’t intentional.

I have answered as best I can, given that I am a “nobody” and a layman. I am aware I have grossly simplified and paraphrased much of the Russians,Piers Corbyn and NASA's work.

There is no doubt that the Russians and Piers Corbyn could give much much better rebuttals to your arguments, I’m sure you ALL know that.

 

[Reality Check]

So, the ad-hom’s begin, the AGW people don’t like his “message” and attack the “man” This is a typical and I feel,distasteful tactic in this debate.

It is not an ad-hom to state the obvious. By citing press interviews of Piers Corbyn rather than his actual science you are giving him the same status as other people who use the same tactics. This includes psychics.

Then you go and post a link to a video of him .
Basically all you are doing is advertising his services.

All I’m doing is giving those people (of a less biased attitude) a chance to see the attempted smears and misinformation for what they are.

There are no attempted smears and misinformation, just the facts

• Piers Corbyn has not presented the science behind his weather forecasting method.
• The physical fact is that variations in space weather have energies that are a billion times less energetic than the Sun's TSI. This rules out any weather forecasting method based on FTE, CME, flares, etc.
• I will not go into his claims that the Moon's "elevation influenced the climate" and "other magnetic factors" in the press interviews that you cited. I will wait for Piers Corbyn publishing his paper on this. Jusging by his record I will have a long wait - nothing from him in the 10 or more years that he has been running his business.
• The variations in the TSI do have an impact on climate. Any climate predictions based soley on TSI would be that global temperatures would decrease slightly in the last 35 years. Some other driver else has driven the global temperatures upwards instead.
  A prediction of climate does not allow the forecasting of specific weather events. It only allow you to say that the temperature/rainfall/snowfall/etc will vary over a period of years.

 

[varwoche]

I brought in Piers Corbyn and his SWT because his ideas support the above.

So, the ad-hom’s begin, the AGW people don’t like his “message” and attack the “man” This is a typical and I feel,distasteful tactic in this debate.

If you want your cites to be taken seriously, don't cite abject jokes ala Corbyn.

 

[Haig]

If you want your cites to be taken seriously, don't cite abject jokes ala Corbyn.

That's your opinion; it doesn’t mean it's true.

 

[BenBurch]

That's your opinion; it doesn’t mean it's true.

If he were other than a joke, he'd have a Nobel Prize by now...

 

[Haig]

If he were other than a joke, he'd have a Nobel Prize by now...

more ad hom

 

[BenBurch]

more ad hom

No. Reality. He claims to be able to predict weather a year out. Not only would he be rich because that has economic value, but he would be FAMOUS as he would have changed the whole science of meteorology forever.

 

[Haig]

No. Reality. He claims to be able to predict weather a year out. Not only would he be rich because that has economic value, but he would be FAMOUS as he would have changed the whole science of meteorology forever.

He's getting there

"New snow deluges USA Britain & Ireland superbly forecast - and it is not over yet
Recent snow deluges 15th-17th Feb in USA & UK are superb confirmation of WeatherAction warnings and it is not over yet warns Piers Corbyn"
http://www.weatheraction.com/pages/pv.asp?p=wact36&fsize=0

Watch this space!

 

[Haig]

He's getting there

"New snow deluges USA Britain & Ireland superbly forecast - and it is not over yet
Recent snow deluges 15th-17th Feb in USA & UK are superb confirmation of WeatherAction warnings and it is not over yet warns Piers Corbyn"
http://www.weatheraction.com/pages/pv.asp?p=wact36&fsize=0

Watch this space!

and more

PIERS CORBYN
More DANGEROUS WARNINGS issued by WeatherAction.com from Piers Corbyn

http://climaterealists.com/index.php?id=5104

He seems to be getting more famous to me

 

[BenBurch]

Keep deluding yourself.

 

[ben m]

I don’t think your right. The “space weather” can’t, IMHO, be dismissed so lightly. This 93 million mile long magnetic rope connecting the Sun and Earth along with the million miles an hour solar wind are key.

You don't seem to recognize that climate has something to do with energy balance. The climate can't possibly know or care how long or wide a solar magnetic feature is. It can't care about the field strength, the particle velocity, or even the particle species involved. The temperature of the Earth cares about how much thermal energy there is at the surface of the Earth, which means it cares how much energy arrives and how much leaves.

There is no doubt that the Russians and Piers Corbyn could give much much better rebuttals to your arguments, I’m sure you ALL know that.

Double-standard, much? After complaining about ad-hominems, you are once again saying "your numbers are ignorable because I have a Reliable Source on my side". You are wrong---my numbers are not ignorable, and your source is not reliable, and (lacking any scientific content from you to rebut) it's not an ad hominem to tell you so.

 

[Haig]

Keep deluding yourself.

Don't you mean PC?

I'm an "unsure" remember?...... just playing Devil's Advocate

 

[Haig]

You don't seem to recognize that climate has something to do with energy balance. The climate can't possibly know or care how long or wide a solar magnetic feature is. It can't care about the field strength, the particle velocity, or even the particle species involved. The temperature of the Earth cares about how much thermal energy there is at the surface of the Earth, which means it cares how much energy arrives and how much leaves.

So your saying NASA are wrong?

First Global Connection Between Earth And Space Weather Found

Weather on Earth has a surprising connection to space weather occurring high in the electrically-charged upper atmosphere, known as the ionosphere, according to new results from NASA satellites.

"This discovery will help improve forecasts of turbulence in the ionosphere, which can disrupt radio transmissions and the reception of signals from the Global Positioning System," said Thomas Immel of the University of California, Berkeley, lead author of a paper on the research published August 11 in Geophysical Research Letters.

Researchers discovered that tides of air generated by intense thunderstorm activity over South America, Africa and Southeast Asia were altering the structure of the ionosphere.


mage below: This is a false-color image of ultraviolet light from two plasma bands in the ionosphere that encircle the Earth over the equator. Bright, blue-white areas are where the plasma is densest. Solid white lines outline the continents; Africa is on the left, and North and South America are on the right. Dotted white lines mark regions where rising tides of hot air indirectly create the bright, dense zones in the bands. The picture is a composite built up from 30 days of observations with NASA's IMAGE satellite (March 20 to April 20, 2002). Credit: NASA/University of California, Berkeley

"This discovery has immediate implications for space weather, identifying four sectors on the Earth where space storms may produce greater ionospheric disturbances. North America is in one of these sectors, which may help explain why the U.S. suffers uniquely extreme ionospheric conditions during space weather events," Immel said.

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/news/topstory/2006/space_weather_link.html

Double-standard, much? After complaining about ad-hominems, you are once again saying "your numbers are ignorable because I have a Reliable Source on my side". You are wrong---my numbers are not ignorable, and your source is not reliable, and (lacking any scientific content from you to rebut) it's not an ad hominem to tell you so.

I have a few reliable sourses one of them is NASA

 

[Tubbythin]

So your saying NASA are wrong?

First Global Connection Between Earth And Space Weather Found

Weather on Earth has a surprising connection to space weather occurring high in the electrically-charged upper atmosphere, known as the ionosphere, according to new results from NASA satellites.

"This discovery will help improve forecasts of turbulence in the ionosphere, which can disrupt radio transmissions and the reception of signals from the Global Positioning System," said Thomas Immel of the University of California, Berkeley, lead author of a paper on the research published August 11 in Geophysical Research Letters.

Researchers discovered that tides of air generated by intense thunderstorm activity over South America, Africa and Southeast Asia were altering the structure of the ionosphere.


mage below: This is a false-color image of ultraviolet light from two plasma bands in the ionosphere that encircle the Earth over the equator. Bright, blue-white areas are where the plasma is densest. Solid white lines outline the continents; Africa is on the left, and North and South America are on the right. Dotted white lines mark regions where rising tides of hot air indirectly create the bright, dense zones in the bands. The picture is a composite built up from 30 days of observations with NASA's IMAGE satellite (March 20 to April 20, 2002). Credit: NASA/University of California, Berkeley

"This discovery has immediate implications for space weather, identifying four sectors on the Earth where space storms may produce greater ionospheric disturbances. North America is in one of these sectors, which may help explain why the U.S. suffers uniquely extreme ionospheric conditions during space weather events," Immel said.

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/news/topstory/2006/space_weather_link.html



I have a few reliable sourses one of them is NASA

How do you think that article supports you in any way?

 

[ben m]

Haig, let's start from Physics 101. In order to heat up a cup of water, you expose the water to:

a) energy in the amount of 4.18 J per degree
b) An ionospheric disturbance
c) A handful of particles from the Sun carrying 1 keV each
d) A 10ug magnetic field which turns on and off every 8 minutes
e) the Van Allen belt
f) the aurora.

Where does your reliable NASA source tell you that solar non-TSI fluxes are more energetic than the CO2-absorbed component of the TSI? Where, Haig? It doesn't tell you that because it's not true. You are quoting a source that does not tell you what you think it tells you.

 

[Dancing David]

I don’t think your right. The “space weather” can’t, IMHO, be dismissed so lightly. This 93 million mile long magnetic rope connecting the Sun and Earth along with the million miles an hour solar wind are key.

Yet when the proportion of energy possible from the magnetic rope is given and it is way small by a huge factor, you argued from god of the gaps.
1/1000000000 is a very small amount to effect the energy budget of the earth.

Yes, I am impressed by these facts, aren’t you? NASA are puzzled too, a portal, the size of the Earth, opens every 8 mins above our heads, day and night. They don’t understand how or why these magnetic ropes (FTE’s) stay as a cohesive entity all that distance. The solar wind can virtually stop for days and they don’t know why? PC uses measurements of the solar wind and magnetic events on the Sun to do his stuff. I don’t really have sides, it’s just that his and the Russians theories, tell me the science isn’t settled.

When you show the actuakl data thats ays there is an effect then it is more than a hypothesis, you should try to understand the argument you say are settled. they are not but what fraction of 1/1000000000 is significant?

So, your math, (I’m sure you have done it right) aren’t the “deal buster” you think it is. We all remember who the Wright Bros were and what they did.

That is a really weak appeal to emotion, it does not belong here, and is quite inaccurate.

Wraping your self in the flag of teh Wright brothers makes you a scoundrel not a patriot!

We don’t care, now, about the mathematician who “proved” it couldn’t be done.

And that is just another fable and myth, one person said it could not be done and you are hiding from the facts as presented to you.

Really weak as a form of argument.

I have still to respond to posts on page three and I will get around to them. If you think some of the arguments before that are really vital to this debate and I have side stepped them unfairly, please point them out, or restate them. And I will give a response in my next big post.

Maybe I have “mischaracterized much of the discussion” I’m sorry if you think that, it wasn’t intentional.

I have answered as best I can, given that I am a “nobody” and a layman. I am aware I have grossly simplified and paraphrased much of the Russians,Piers Corbyn and NASA's work.

And you have just pointedly dismissed counter argument with a hand wave and appeals to emotion. Sorry this is the JREF, that will not wash.

There is no doubt that the Russians and Piers Corbyn could give much much better rebuttals to your arguments, I’m sure you ALL know that.

Except that maybe they are wrong.

You should not present things without trying to understand the arguments.