2011-09-21 07:03:32New GCR rebuttal
muoncounter
Dan Friedman
dfriedman3@comcast...
216.227.243.189

Galactic cosmic rays:  Backing the wrong horse

 

Fixed link

 

The 'c' key on my laptop is dead.  You have no idea how much fun it is writing about 'gala_ti_  _osmi_ rays' and having to cut and paste in all the missing c's.

 

There is an additional part to this: Data from the Pierre Auger Observatory, designed to see ultra high energy cosmic rays, show that they do indeed ionize, but do not  correlate with anything related to temperature.  But this part is long enough.  I'd be happy to write that up as well (once I get my c's).

 

Let me know what you think!

2011-09-21 07:08:46
nealjking

nealjking@gmail...
91.33.104.94

This links to a special "Author's Edit" format that's hard to read. Could you check & redo the link?

2011-09-21 07:43:12
Riccardo

riccardoreitano@tiscali...
93.147.82.133

Here is the correct link

2011-09-21 22:17:15
MarkR
Mark Richardson
m.t.richardson2@gmail...
192.171.166.133

You just need to learn to use CTRL+V in place of 'c' when typing ;)

2011-09-21 22:19:24
MarkR
Mark Richardson
m.t.richardson2@gmail...
192.171.166.133

Looks interesting, I'll read it after work!

2011-09-22 04:24:19
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
64.129.227.4

It would probably be worth mentioning the whole "skeptic" kerfuffle over Kirkby's CERN experiments, and the fact that some "skeptics" are still claiming it proves GCRs are causing global warming (goddamn, Forbes is a piece of crap).

We also have to do something with jg's graph, once he finishes putting together the figure with cosmic rays vs. temperature.  Maybe that could go in your post, or we could do a separate post, and talk about "skeptics" and CERN there instead.

2011-09-22 06:08:10Forbes blog is indeed crap, but so what?
muoncounter
Dan Friedman
dfriedman3@comcast...
216.227.243.189

How is this for a sequence?  This post shows that the cLOUD experiment isn't really testing the GcR hypothesis.  I have another post in process that shows that recent changes in flux of ultra-high energy GcRs doesn't correlate with temperature changes. Jg's graph could sum it all up showing no correlation now or ever.

 

But people getting their science from business mags aren't going to buy into any form of reality-based rebuttal.

2011-09-22 06:42:38
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
64.129.227.4

That sounds good.

Remember that SkS is basically a myth busting site, so my point is just that it's worthwhile to show that the myth you're busting still persists.

2011-09-22 12:30:46Fixed opening
muoncounter
Dan Friedman
dfriedman3@comcast...
76.30.158.238

I added a ref to the existing rebuttal and a mention that the pushers are still selling this drug.

2011-09-22 13:59:02
jg
John Garrett
garrjohn@gmail...
96.229.221.76
I added satellite solar irradiance to the redrawn Krisova chart. I'll share what I have when I return to my computer in the morning (about 8 hrs from now) and you can tell me what it needs should you decide to use it in this post.
2011-09-23 02:59:53
jg
John Garrett
garrjohn@gmail...
98.112.44.162

This is still a work in progress, and I would like to pose a few questions. This shows which data I've included. Not all may need to be shown. I have GISS on this, but when I scaled it to match the Krivova temperature scale, GISS was all over the place. In other words, I need to smooth the GISS data to get a clean line, so the first question is do we want to show the Krisova temperature reconstruction that I traced, or use a smoothed GISS or other dataset. I need direction on how to smooth a GISS set.

Second question: The Krisova CLIMAX dataset doesn't match the one I placed on top because Krisova has been filtered via means I don't understand. What's the recommendation?

I added a gray bar to illustrate low high solar activity correlates to high cosmic rays reaching Earth

2011-09-23 03:34:03
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
64.129.227.4

For Krisova I'd just add a note (in the figure caption or something) that it's been filtered.  For GISS, you can do a 5-year (60 month) running average, but that will make it end in 2009.  That's not so bad though - you'll still be able to see the recent high temps vs. high cosmic ray flux.

Your gray line already shows that point nicely - low solar activity, high cosmic ray flux, and yet warming temperature.

I'd also suggest creating a simplified version, because this one is a bit cluttered.  Like maybe combine Krivova and CLIMAX and OULA together.  You may have to cut off Krivova in 1950 to make this look good, but just make clear what you've done so we're not accused of "hiding the decline" or something.  Then just compare it to GISTEMP, perhaps with a 5-year running average.

2011-09-23 03:34:44graph
muoncounter
Dan Friedman
dfriedman3@comcast...
216.227.243.189

If you are using GISSTemps, why stop at 2000?  GW didn't stop in '98 (or so I've heard).

 

Is the blue curve representing Krivova?  It doesn't look like the same planet.  I'm not sure what the point of the Reconstructions/climax division line is any longer, as it is obvious that there are only neutron records since the '50s.

 

I'd like to see a graphic comparing minimally filtered GISStemps and cosmic ray counts from 1950-present.  You have to be careful with the filtering because it would be nice to see just how bad the temperature-cosmic ray counts correlation really is.

2011-09-23 03:39:33
muoncounter
Dan Friedman
dfriedman3@comcast...
216.227.243.189

A nice version of the cr-sunspot anti correlation, but doesn't go far enough towards the present:

 

From here.

2011-09-23 03:57:39
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
64.129.227.4

muon - jg's temps come from Kriovova's paper.  He hasn't included GISTEMP yet.  All three of the ~1850 to 2000 lines in the middle of the figure are from Krivova.

2011-09-23 03:59:09
muoncounter
Dan Friedman
dfriedman3@comcast...
216.227.243.189

Figure 1 in Lockwood and Froelich 2007 is also similar to what you're trying to do.  But Warwik Hughes thinks this is wrong, as if that matters.

2011-09-23 05:00:19
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
64.129.227.4

What do you think muon - is this post ready to publish, or do you want to include jg's chart, or make any other changes first?

2011-09-23 06:14:13
jg
John Garrett
garrjohn@gmail...
98.112.44.162

Muon: If the chart is desired, I could revise it for you this evening (e.g., about 6 hours from now) or have it for you tomorrow. Taking the quick route, I just brought in smoothed GISS temperatures (from the excel file SKS shared on http://www.skepticalscience.com/Comparing-all-the-temperature-records.html) to replace Krivova's and can use the CLIMAX and/or OULA data for cosmic rays and also focus on the years 1950 to ~2005. This will give a resolution similar to the sample sunspot and cosmic ray chart you just shared.

I'm going to do this anyway, but let me know if you want it soon.

2011-09-23 07:02:48
muoncounter
Dan Friedman
dfriedman3@comcast...
216.227.243.189

dana- I don't think jg's chart fits here; this is more of a 'why the experiment won't work' than a 'it doesn't match the temperatures'.  I'm looking hard at high energy cr data with the eye to comparing that to temperature next.  The jg chart might make a better fit there.

 

I'm ready to go with it if there aren't any other comments.

 

jg - good idea about the prior chart; no big rush on this one.

 

Thanks