Alt bidrager til globale klimaændringer

Tilknyttet fil:
soonetal2011.pdf

Det er dog naivt at tro at man kan sætte fingeren på én eneste faktor, som skulle styre noget så komplekst som jordens klima. Derfor giver det mening at fremtidens forskning foregår i interdisciplinære grupper med eksperter på en lang række felter, som arbejder sammen i stedet for at forsøge at vise at netop deres område er den styrende faktor.
Kun ved at se på ALLE bidrag til temperaturændringer kan man lave en sammenhængende model, da det er tydeligt at én variable alene ikke er nok til at forklare observationerne uanset tidsskala.

This dispute presumably has some distance to run.

But Mike Lockwood's larger conclusion that current warming has nothing to do with solar changes is backed up by others - notably the IPCC, which concluded earlier this year that since temperatures began rising rapidly in the 1970s, the contribution of humankind's greenhouse gas emissions has outweighed that of the Sun by a factor of about 13 to one.

Even though misguided journalists have sometimes mistaken his work as implying a solar cause to modern-day warming, Sami Solanki agrees with the IPCC verdict.

"Since 1970, the cosmic ray flux has not changed markedly while the global temperature has shown a rapid rise," he says. "And that lack of correlation is proof that the Sun doesn't cause the warming we are seeing now."

Even to prove that the link between cosmic rays and cloud cover matters in the real world needs a lot more work, observes Joanna Haigh.

"You need to demonstrate a whole long chain of events - that the atmosphere is ionised, then that the ionised particles act to nucleate the condensation of water vapour, then that you form droplets, and then that you get clouds; and you have to show it's important in comparison to other sources of nucleation.

"And that hasn't been demonstrated. Proponents of this mechanism have tended to extrapolate their results beyond what is reasonable from the evidence."

And Giles Harrison believes climate sceptics need to apply the same scepticism to the cosmic ray theory as they do to greenhouse warming - particularly those who say there are too many holes in our understanding of how clouds behave in the man-made greenhouse.

"There is some double-speak going on, as uncertainties apply to many aspects of clouds," he says.

"If clouds have to be understood better to understand greenhouse warming, then, as we have only an emerging understanding of the electrical aspects of aerosols and non-thunderstorm clouds, that is probably also true of any effect of cosmic rays on clouds."

Det er dog naivt at tro at man kan sætte fingeren på én eneste faktor, som skulle styre noget så komplekst som jordens klima. Derfor giver det mening at fremtidens forskning foregår i interdisciplinære grupper med eksperter på en lang række felter, som arbejder sammen i stedet for at forsøge at vise at netop deres område er den styrende faktor.
Kun ved at se på ALLE bidrag til temperaturændringer kan man lave en sammenhængende model, da det er tydeligt at én variable alene ikke er nok til at forklare observationerne uanset tidsskala

Hvor meget er den globale temperatur steget? Hvorfor viser forskellige institutter vildt forskellige tal - og gør de egentlig det? Lær mere om udviklingen af den globale temperatur, når Dansk Meteorologisk Selskab (DaMS) indbyder til foredrag.

Hvor pålidelig er tidsserien for Jordens temperatur de seneste par hundrede år; som f.eks. den leveret af GISS til højre? Kritikere kommer med en vifte af argumenter for, hvorfor Jordens temperatur faktisk ikke er steget...