Home | About Us | Writers | Contact Us
Search

For Advertising Info, Write.
rwnews@blogads.com
Premium Left blogad
Left Blog Ad

Advertisement
Permalinks
Climate Alarmists Attempted To Shut Down CERN Sun Science
Written By : William Teach

We on the Climate Realist side are constantly told that we need to offer up actual hard science (as opposed to that murky consensus thing) to prove that anthropogenic global warming is not happening, despite their being statistically no hard proof from the True Believer side that their pet cause is real. Yet, what happens when scientists want to do actual science?

New, convincing evidence indicates global warming is caused by cosmic rays and the sun — not humans

The science is now all-but-settled on global warming, convincing new evidence demonstrates, but Al Gore, the IPCC and other global warming doomsayers won’t be celebrating. The new findings point to cosmic rays and the sun — not human activities — as the dominant controller of climate on Earth.

The research, published with little fanfare this week in the prestigious journal Nature, comes from über-prestigious CERN, the European Organization for Nuclear Research, one of the world’s largest centres for scientific research involving 60 countries and 8,000 scientists at more than 600 universities and national laboratories. CERN is the organization that invented the World Wide Web, that built the multi-billion dollar Large Hadron Collider, and that has now built a pristinely clean stainless steel chamber that precisely recreated the Earth’s atmosphere.

In this chamber, 63 CERN scientists from 17 European and American institutes have done what global warming doomsayers said could never be done — demonstrate that cosmic rays promote the formation of molecules that in Earth’s atmosphere can grow and seed clouds, the cloudier and thus cooler it will be. Because the sun’s magnetic field controls how many cosmic rays reach Earth’s atmosphere (the stronger the sun’s magnetic field, the more it shields Earth from incoming cosmic rays from space), the sun determines the temperature on Earth.

Well, there’s your science, Warmists, demonstrating in a scientific manner what has been known for a long time. Yet, what happens when you Warmists see this actual scientific proof?

The hypothesis that cosmic rays and the sun hold the key to the global warming debate has been Enemy No. 1 to the global warming establishment ever since it was first proposed by two scientists from the Danish Space Research Institute, at a 1996 scientific conference in the U.K. Within one day, the chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Bert Bolin, denounced the theory, saying, “I find the move from this pair scientifically extremely naive and irresponsible.” He then set about discrediting the theory, any journalist that gave the theory cre dence, and most of all the Danes presenting the theory — they soon found themselves vilified, marginalized and starved of funding, despite their impeccable scientific credentials.

Attack the messenger, not the message. And, regarding the scientific experiment, you would think that it would be easy to get done, right? Wrong. Jasper Kirby, a CERN scientist, had convinced CERN to allow the CLOUD experiment (Cosmics Leaving OUtdoor Droplets), and

The global warming establishment sprang into action, pressured the Western governments that control CERN, and almost immediately succeeded in suspending CLOUD. It took Mr. Kirkby almost a decade of negotiation with his superiors, and who knows how many compromises and unspoken commitments, to convince the CERN bureaucracy to allow the project to proceed. And years more to create the cloud chamber and convincingly validate the Danes’ groundbreaking theory.

So, when someone wanted to do actual hard scientific experiments, the alarmists did all they could to stop it. Furthermore, as the article points out, the big wigs at CERN want the scientists to keep all politics out of the findings, and censored much of the findings and muzzled the scientists.

Funny how the True Believers (who want Everyone Else to be forced to practice what they preach) who always say the Realists are “anti-science” are scared to allow actual science to be performed and published. And unable to offer cogent and coherent scientific rebuttals.

Watts Up With That? has much discussion of the experiment as well as links to the appropriate papers.

And then there is IPCC Vice Chair van Ypersele shutting down open scientific inquiry, per No Trick Zone, which also points out that Globull warming is now causing the sea levels….to drop!

(Note: all except the last paragraph was written back on the 27th for posting later in the day, as I usually write a few in the morning for posting later in the day, as I have no access to a PC at work, and writing one on a Droid is a pain, and just forgot.)

Crossed at Pirate’s Cove. Follow me on Twitter @WilliamTeach.

9
  • JoeBrit

    If you’re going to quote scientific evidence, one would certainly not expect it to be sifted through (interpreted by) a right wing political rag like the Financial Post. Just who are the true believers remains to be seen. Get back.

    • Anonymous

      It’s in Nature from CERN scientists, you moron. Links to the actual article and research are located elsewhere in the article if you’d bother to read.

      But I know, facts and words disturb your worldview and make you think.

      • Anonymous

        Well, you’re half right.  Nothing could make troll think.

    • Anonymous

      It’s in Nature from CERN scientists, you moron. Links to the actual article and research are located elsewhere in the article if you’d bother to read.

      But I know, facts and words disturb your worldview and make you think.

    • http://www.thepiratescove.us/ William_Teach

      So, you cannot offer anything other than attacking the messenger, eh? Which was exactly one of my two points. The other being that you Believers attempt to shut down the actual scientific investigation if it might show that your hypotheses is a complete load of bullshit. Which real science always does.

      • JoeBrit

        Recommendation: stay away from political writers. You should have done what I just did and posted (in part) an interpretation from a scientist. Afraid the research just doesn’t support your accepted interpretation and is far from definitive.

        • http://www.patriotpost.com bthewolf

          Recommedation: Stop being a stooge for the Big Hoax.

          • Anonymous

            Not going to happen.  The bitch’s religion is Leftism and one of its sacraments is chicken little alarmism.

        • http://www.thepiratescove.us/ William_Teach

          Dumbass, there is a link to Watts Up With That which breaks it down. Furthermore, dumbass, the point is that you alarmists attempted to shut down scientific research that would prove your cult wrong.

          I know you have a tough time understand the issue.

          • JoeBrit

            Watts is a climate change denier, something you should have known, given your interest in this topic.

    • http://www.patriotpost.com bthewolf

      http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/46953 Here you go Slow Joe, a non-political article that supports Teach. Kindly read the science and quit following the politics of AlBore the Moronic.

      • JoeBrit

        Well since my posts are being censored, there’s no longer any point in engaging in this debate.

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OLKR3A5PPIEHCG2HRJOGOOYWUY Joe

          For 4 years now I’ve watched leftists get censored and booted off this site (usually for good reason) while some of the regulars are let to spout off the most vile and rudest comments on the internet.   William_Teach is a perfect example of this actually.

      • JoeBrit

        Well since my posts are being censored, there’s no longer any point in engaging in this debate.

  • JoeBrit

    If you’re going to quote scientific evidence, one would certainly not expect it to be sifted through (interpreted by) a right wing political rag like the Financial Post. Just who are the true believers remains to be seen. Get back.

  • Anonymous

    Boy, bet the libs didn’t see that coming. All this time they were expecting science to debunk God, and instead science debunked liberalism.

  • Anonymous

    Boy, bet the libs didn’t see that coming. All this time they were expecting science to debunk God, and instead science debunked liberalism.

  • JoeBrit

     
    Original article (too technical)
     
    Kirkby, J. et al. Nature 476, 429-433 (2011).
     
    Interpretation at Nature.com:
     
    http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110824/full/news.2011.504.html#B1
     
    Cloud formation may be linked to cosmic rays
     

    It sounds like a conspiracy theory: ‘cosmic rays’ from deep space might be creating clouds in Earth’s atmosphere and changing the climate. Yet an experiment at CERN, Europe’s high-energy physics laboratory near Geneva, Switzerland, is finding tentative evidence for just that.
     
    The findings, published today in Nature1, are preliminary, but they are stoking a long-running argument over the role of radiation from distant stars in altering the climate.
     
    For a century, scientists have known that charged particles from space constantly bombard Earth. Known as cosmic rays, the particles are mostly protons blasted out of supernovae. As the protons crash through the planet’s atmosphere, they can ionize volatile compounds, causing them to condense into airborne droplets, or aerosols. Clouds might then build up around the droplets.
     
    The number of cosmic rays that reach Earth depends on the Sun. When the Sun is emitting lots of radiation, its magnetic field shields the planet from cosmic rays. During periods of low solar activity, more cosmic rays reach Earth.
     
    Scientists agree on these basic facts, but there is far less agreement on whether cosmic rays can have a large role in cloud formation and climate change. Since the late 1990s, some have suggested that when high solar activity lowers levels of cosmic rays, that in turn reduces cloud cover and warms the planet. Others say that there is no statistical evidence for such an effect.
     
    Early results seem to indicate that cosmic rays do cause a change. The high-energy protons seemed to enhance the production of nanometre-sized particles from the gaseous atmosphere by more than a factor of ten. But, Kirkby adds, those particles are far too small to serve as seeds for clouds. “At the moment, it actually says nothing about a possible cosmic-ray effect on clouds and climate, but it’s a very important first step,” he says.
     
    Scientists on both sides of the debate welcome the findings, although they draw differing conclusions. “Of course there are many things to explore, but I think the cosmic-ray/cloud-seeding hypothesis is converging with reality,” says Henrik Svensmark, a physicist at the Technical University of Denmark in Copenhagen, who claims a link between climate change and cosmic rays.
     
    Others disagree. The CLOUD experiment is “not firming up the connection”, counters Mike Lockwood, a space and environmental physicist at the University of Reading, UK, who is sceptical. Lockwood says that the small particles may not grow fast enough or large enough to be important in comparison with other cloud-forming processes in the atmosphere.
     

     
    Read the rest for yourselves.
     

    • http://www.patriotpost.com bthewolf

      And it’s a near perfect vindication of the above article. But you only believe the skeptics.

    • http://www.cavalierx.com CavalierX

      “Read the rest for yourselves.”
      Oh, we did. The science proves that the sun is largely responsible for global warming (and cooling), as we’ve been saying for years. It’s sad how you cling to the two word sentence “Others disagree” like a drowning man to the only stick in the water. And these others offer no hard science to refute CERN’s findings, merely vague disagreement.

    • http://www.cavalierx.com CavalierX

      “Read the rest for yourselves.”
      Oh, we did. The science proves that the sun is largely responsible for global warming (and cooling), as we’ve been saying for years. It’s sad how you cling to the two word sentence “Others disagree” like a drowning man to the only stick in the water. And these others offer no hard science to refute CERN’s findings, merely vague disagreement.

      • http://www.thepiratescove.us/ William_Teach

        Joe, like the rest of the Warmists, thinks that’s how science works, by taking a poll.

        • JoeBrit

          There are no experiments that can be suggested but the idea that the CERN findings need refutation is ridiculous. They are being overinterpreted, obviously. Even if there were a strong effect that could be generalized from a chamber to the real world, those findings would have to be interpreted in the context of the past hundred years. Has there been a progressively increasing effect of the sun on cosmic rays over that period?

          It is the same problem the CO2 findings confront, the many times replicated experimental finding that CO2 in sunlight is capable of causing a greenhouse effect.

          • http://www.thepiratescove.us/ William_Teach

            So, let’s see: validating that the Sun is one of the primary drivers of climate is silly, but the notion that CO2 is the only driver of climate isn’t? Boy, you’ve been totally brainwashed.

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OLKR3A5PPIEHCG2HRJOGOOYWUY Joe

            The research says absolutely nothing like that.   You are either lying or have misunderstood it.

          • http://www.thepiratescove.us/ William_Teach

            The Sun has always been a primary driver of climate. The fact that Warmists believe otherwise proves that they are idiots, un-scientific, and cultists.

          • http://www.thepiratescove.us/ William_Teach

            The Sun has always been a primary driver of climate. The fact that Warmists believe otherwise proves that they are idiots, un-scientific, and cultists.

          • JoeBrit

            False. No one has indicated that the sun and even cloud cover and a lot of other things have no effects on climate. That’s ridiculous. It is not climate that is at issue here, but global warming and the question: what is causing these small increments in temperature these past hundred years?

          • Jfisher17

            In fact, I remember in a meteorology class someone asking the simple  question- What causes “weather”? Very general question, but of course it all starts there. The prof’s answer- The un-even heating of the earth’s surface. It all springs from there. And of course, what causes the heating? The sun.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OLKR3A5PPIEHCG2HRJOGOOYWUY Joe

        You are are either a complete liar, or you have been misinformed.   The science does in no way prove the sun is largely responsible.
        http://www.skepticalscience.com/solar-activity-sunspots-global-warming.htm

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OLKR3A5PPIEHCG2HRJOGOOYWUY Joe

        You are are either a complete liar, or you have been misinformed.   The science does in no way prove the sun is largely responsible.
        http://www.skepticalscience.com/solar-activity-sunspots-global-warming.htm

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OLKR3A5PPIEHCG2HRJOGOOYWUY Joe

        You are are either a complete liar, or you have been misinformed.   The science does in no way prove the sun is largely responsible.
        http://www.skepticalscience.com/solar-activity-sunspots-global-warming.htm

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OLKR3A5PPIEHCG2HRJOGOOYWUY Joe

        You are are either a complete liar, or you have been misinformed.   The science does in no way prove the sun is largely responsible.
        http://www.skepticalscience.com/solar-activity-sunspots-global-warming.htm

    • http://www.cavalierx.com CavalierX

      “Read the rest for yourselves.”
      Oh, we did. The science proves that the sun is largely responsible for global warming (and cooling), as we’ve been saying for years. It’s sad how you cling to the two word sentence “Others disagree” like a drowning man to the only stick in the water. And these others offer no hard science to refute CERN’s findings, merely vague disagreement.

    • http://www.cavalierx.com CavalierX

      “Read the rest for yourselves.”
      Oh, we did. The science proves that the sun is largely responsible for global warming (and cooling), as we’ve been saying for years. It’s sad how you cling to the two word sentence “Others disagree” like a drowning man to the only stick in the water. And these others offer no hard science to refute CERN’s findings, merely vague disagreement.

  • JoeBrit

     
    Original article (too technical)
     
    Kirkby, J. et al. Nature 476, 429-433 (2011).
     
    Interpretation at Nature.com:
     
    http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110824/full/news.2011.504.html#B1
     
    Cloud formation may be linked to cosmic rays
     

    It sounds like a conspiracy theory: ‘cosmic rays’ from deep space might be creating clouds in Earth’s atmosphere and changing the climate. Yet an experiment at CERN, Europe’s high-energy physics laboratory near Geneva, Switzerland, is finding tentative evidence for just that.
     
    The findings, published today in Nature1, are preliminary, but they are stoking a long-running argument over the role of radiation from distant stars in altering the climate.
     
    For a century, scientists have known that charged particles from space constantly bombard Earth. Known as cosmic rays, the particles are mostly protons blasted out of supernovae. As the protons crash through the planet’s atmosphere, they can ionize volatile compounds, causing them to condense into airborne droplets, or aerosols. Clouds might then build up around the droplets.
     
    The number of cosmic rays that reach Earth depends on the Sun. When the Sun is emitting lots of radiation, its magnetic field shields the planet from cosmic rays. During periods of low solar activity, more cosmic rays reach Earth.
     
    Scientists agree on these basic facts, but there is far less agreement on whether cosmic rays can have a large role in cloud formation and climate change. Since the late 1990s, some have suggested that when high solar activity lowers levels of cosmic rays, that in turn reduces cloud cover and warms the planet. Others say that there is no statistical evidence for such an effect.
     
    Early results seem to indicate that cosmic rays do cause a change. The high-energy protons seemed to enhance the production of nanometre-sized particles from the gaseous atmosphere by more than a factor of ten. But, Kirkby adds, those particles are far too small to serve as seeds for clouds. “At the moment, it actually says nothing about a possible cosmic-ray effect on clouds and climate, but it’s a very important first step,” he says.
     
    Scientists on both sides of the debate welcome the findings, although they draw differing conclusions. “Of course there are many things to explore, but I think the cosmic-ray/cloud-seeding hypothesis is converging with reality,” says Henrik Svensmark, a physicist at the Technical University of Denmark in Copenhagen, who claims a link between climate change and cosmic rays.
     
    Others disagree. The CLOUD experiment is “not firming up the connection”, counters Mike Lockwood, a space and environmental physicist at the University of Reading, UK, who is sceptical. Lockwood says that the small particles may not grow fast enough or large enough to be important in comparison with other cloud-forming processes in the atmosphere.
     

     
    Read the rest for yourselves.
     

  • JoeBrit

     
    Original article (too technical)
     
    Kirkby, J. et al. Nature 476, 429-433 (2011).
     
    Interpretation at Nature.com:
     
    http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110824/full/news.2011.504.html#B1
     
    Cloud formation may be linked to cosmic rays
     

    It sounds like a conspiracy theory: ‘cosmic rays’ from deep space might be creating clouds in Earth’s atmosphere and changing the climate. Yet an experiment at CERN, Europe’s high-energy physics laboratory near Geneva, Switzerland, is finding tentative evidence for just that.
     
    The findings, published today in Nature1, are preliminary, but they are stoking a long-running argument over the role of radiation from distant stars in altering the climate.
     
    For a century, scientists have known that charged particles from space constantly bombard Earth. Known as cosmic rays, the particles are mostly protons blasted out of supernovae. As the protons crash through the planet’s atmosphere, they can ionize volatile compounds, causing them to condense into airborne droplets, or aerosols. Clouds might then build up around the droplets.
     
    The number of cosmic rays that reach Earth depends on the Sun. When the Sun is emitting lots of radiation, its magnetic field shields the planet from cosmic rays. During periods of low solar activity, more cosmic rays reach Earth.
     
    Scientists agree on these basic facts, but there is far less agreement on whether cosmic rays can have a large role in cloud formation and climate change. Since the late 1990s, some have suggested that when high solar activity lowers levels of cosmic rays, that in turn reduces cloud cover and warms the planet. Others say that there is no statistical evidence for such an effect.
     
    Early results seem to indicate that cosmic rays do cause a change. The high-energy protons seemed to enhance the production of nanometre-sized particles from the gaseous atmosphere by more than a factor of ten. But, Kirkby adds, those particles are far too small to serve as seeds for clouds. “At the moment, it actually says nothing about a possible cosmic-ray effect on clouds and climate, but it’s a very important first step,” he says.
     
    Scientists on both sides of the debate welcome the findings, although they draw differing conclusions. “Of course there are many things to explore, but I think the cosmic-ray/cloud-seeding hypothesis is converging with reality,” says Henrik Svensmark, a physicist at the Technical University of Denmark in Copenhagen, who claims a link between climate change and cosmic rays.
     
    Others disagree. The CLOUD experiment is “not firming up the connection”, counters Mike Lockwood, a space and environmental physicist at the University of Reading, UK, who is sceptical. Lockwood says that the small particles may not grow fast enough or large enough to be important in comparison with other cloud-forming processes in the atmosphere.
     

     
    Read the rest for yourselves.
     

  • Martin Hale

    I’m glad that Cern has pinned down this variable with solid research.  It’s an important finding and largely confirms the earlier work of Henrik Svensmark. 

    But let’s not go overboard celebrating the end of Al Gore just yet.  In all fairness, climate is the result of a complex set of interactions between dozens of variables which may or may not have non-linear relationships.  All this finding does is to pin down one more variable.  We’re a long way from understanding climate as a total entity.  If you objected to CO₂ being portrayed as the sole cause of climate change, you should also have the same objections to solar wind being called the sole cause of climate change.

    But, that said, this finding is an excellent step along the road to knowledge.  For decades, it stood to reason that the Sun, being the source of almost all of Earth’s energy, was the most potent driver of climate, but no one understood the actual mechanism of action.  Now, at least we have a reasonable assessment of one of the ways the Sun affects Earth’s climate.

    • http://www.patriotpost.com bthewolf

      While I agree Martin that’s only one variable, it is also by the largest and most influential one, followed Dihydrous Monoxide, which has also been ignored by the Alarmists.

      • http://www.thepiratescove.us/ William_Teach

        And let’s not forgot that the oceans pump out 16 times the amount of CO2 than Man does. Also, quite a bit more methane. But, the Warmists like Joe refuse to believe science, yet, interestingly, they won’t change their own behavior to match their rhetoric.

        • Martin Hale

          “…interestingly, they won’t change their own behavior to match their rhetoric.”

          Well it’s been amusing to watch Shergald go on about other people politicising the issue when he rarely if ever makes a comment in which he doesn’t relate the topic at hand to politics.  It’s much like his stock complaint about other people leveling ad hominem attacks at him when in just the past two weeks I’ve harvested probably a dozen or more ad hominem attacks posted by him and aimed at various people.

          • http://www.thepiratescove.us/ William_Teach

            Excellent points, Martin.

            And notice that the vast majority of Warmists, including Joe, NEVER answer the question about what they have done to make their lives carbon neutral. It’s always about making someone else change.

          • http://www.thepiratescove.us/ William_Teach

            Excellent points, Martin.

            And notice that the vast majority of Warmists, including Joe, NEVER answer the question about what they have done to make their lives carbon neutral. It’s always about making someone else change.

          • http://www.thepiratescove.us/ William_Teach

            Excellent points, Martin.

            And notice that the vast majority of Warmists, including Joe, NEVER answer the question about what they have done to make their lives carbon neutral. It’s always about making someone else change.

          • http://www.thepiratescove.us/ William_Teach

            Excellent points, Martin.

            And notice that the vast majority of Warmists, including Joe, NEVER answer the question about what they have done to make their lives carbon neutral. It’s always about making someone else change.

          • http://www.thepiratescove.us/ William_Teach

            Excellent points, Martin.

            And notice that the vast majority of Warmists, including Joe, NEVER answer the question about what they have done to make their lives carbon neutral. It’s always about making someone else change.

          • http://www.thepiratescove.us/ William_Teach

            Excellent points, Martin.

            And notice that the vast majority of Warmists, including Joe, NEVER answer the question about what they have done to make their lives carbon neutral. It’s always about making someone else change.

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OLKR3A5PPIEHCG2HRJOGOOYWUY Joe

             The problem with that is that even if anyone responds to those questions you’ve got no reason to believe them….and in fact if JoeBrit did tell you about all the ways he was carbon neutral I bet anything you call him a liar anyway.   So what’s the point?

          • JoeBrit

            The other Joe already chided you about strawman arguments. I won’t repeat, even though they seem more innocuous than Hale’s ad hominems. 

          • JoeBrit

            Hale, that’s all you do is ad hominem, just like many of the other adolescents on this site.

          • JoeBrit

            That’s boloney and you know it. If you really believe that RWN is not a political site, and that GW is not a political issue, then you are certainly obtuse. In fact, Teach admits as much and keeps bringing it up because it apparently is now part of the 2012 election. It is not just Perry’s recent pronouncements on the topic, but the proCorporate focus of the GOP.

            On the other hand, it is obvious that there are no climate scientists wasting their time around here, and as far as I can tell, no one here has a grasp of the science. They only think they do. Fortunately, no one here took a stab at interpreting the original Nature article from CERN. Even though some pretended to be able to do so, they only ended up following the Financial Post and a political writer who obviously thought he knew what he was talking about.

          • Toastrider

            you mad?

        • JoeBrit

          “Rising atmospheric carbon dioxide (C2), primarily from human fossil fuelcombustion, reduces ocean pH and causes wholesale shifts in seawater carbonate chemistry. The process of ocean acidification is well documented infield data, and the rate will accelerate over this century unless future CO22), primarily from human fossil fuelcombustion, reduces ocean pH and causes wholesale shifts in seawater carbonate chemistry. The process of ocean acidification is well documented infield data, and the rate will accelerate over this century unless future CO22emissions are curbed dramatically. Acidification alters seawater chemical speciation and biogeochemical cycles of many elements and compounds.”http://reefresilience.org/pdf/Doney_etal_2009.pdf

      • Martin Hale

        You’re right that clouds are undoubtedly an important actor in the regulation of climate.  And doubly so because regular clouds are mostly the embodiment of that infamous greenhouse agent, water vapour.  It’s no small coincidence that clouds (albeit clouds of much different nature than water vapour clouds) figure prominently in a number of doomsday scenarios such as nuclear winter, volcanic winter and asteroid impact winter.

        I’m just cautioning people that this finding isn’t the final word on MMCC.  We still don’t even know what we don’t know about climate formation and regulation.  Which has been my primary objection to the whole CO₂ hypothesis from the start.  It was always premature to pin climate change onto one variable and one variable alone especially when there are other variables such as volcanism, solar variation, orbital mechanics and the like to be considered.

      • Martin Hale

        You’re right that clouds are undoubtedly an important actor in the regulation of climate.  And doubly so because regular clouds are mostly the embodiment of that infamous greenhouse agent, water vapour.  It’s no small coincidence that clouds (albeit clouds of much different nature than water vapour clouds) figure prominently in a number of doomsday scenarios such as nuclear winter, volcanic winter and asteroid impact winter.

        I’m just cautioning people that this finding isn’t the final word on MMCC.  We still don’t even know what we don’t know about climate formation and regulation.  Which has been my primary objection to the whole CO₂ hypothesis from the start.  It was always premature to pin climate change onto one variable and one variable alone especially when there are other variables such as volcanism, solar variation, orbital mechanics and the like to be considered.

        • http://www.patriotpost.com bthewolf

          Oh don’t get me wrong, just like Slow Joe MMGW isn’t going to die soon, but at least the nails are being pounded into the coffin!

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OLKR3A5PPIEHCG2HRJOGOOYWUY Joe

          Except for the fact that no climate scientist has ever pinned climate change onto one thing.  Even the IPCC report talks in terms of probabilities, not absolutes.    I think most people make the mistake of looking at what Al Gore and the New York Times editorials say on Climate Change rather than looking at the science.

      • Martin Hale

        You’re right that clouds are undoubtedly an important actor in the regulation of climate.  And doubly so because regular clouds are mostly the embodiment of that infamous greenhouse agent, water vapour.  It’s no small coincidence that clouds (albeit clouds of much different nature than water vapour clouds) figure prominently in a number of doomsday scenarios such as nuclear winter, volcanic winter and asteroid impact winter.

        I’m just cautioning people that this finding isn’t the final word on MMCC.  We still don’t even know what we don’t know about climate formation and regulation.  Which has been my primary objection to the whole CO₂ hypothesis from the start.  It was always premature to pin climate change onto one variable and one variable alone especially when there are other variables such as volcanism, solar variation, orbital mechanics and the like to be considered.

    • President Friedman

      Well put, sir.   Knowing that cosmic rays  increase the number of aerosols present in the atmosphere is an important piece of data to have, but by itself it says very little about the relationship between various factors that effect the climate.  

      It has always made intuitive sense to me that the sun would be the largest factor in climate change, and I’ve seen data that clearly links prolonged increases in solar activity to spikes in global temperatures, but there just isn’t much solid data out there regarding the proportional shares of various phenomenon on climate change.   C02 certainly plays a role, and there are probably other factors that aren’t given enough consideration.  The problem I see with both the Alarmists and the Deniers is an assumption that we know a lot more than we really do.  I’m not even convinced that we *can* know. 

      • Martin Hale

        “I’m not even convinced that we *can* know.”

        I’d have to agree with you there.  There are so many natural processes at work to create what we blithely call climate and the way all those processes interact is so complex, I too have doubts that we’ll never get past the level of a theoretical understanding of climate.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OLKR3A5PPIEHCG2HRJOGOOYWUY Joe

         Pres….I’ve been following this site for years now, but don’t post (yes I know one of the regulars will say that I’m the same “joe”), and you are among a handful of commentors  who puts forth intelligent comments.     I like how you use the term “Alarmists” AND “Deniers”…because that’s exactly the problem we have here.  The Alarmists and Deniers duke it out, but unfortunately both completely misunderstand the science.    The “debate” going on the political world about climate change is completely different then what’s going on in science.    The real debate is not if global warming is happening or not…it is the magnitude of the various contributers and the future predictions.     Unfortunately, conservatives are missing a major opportunity to battle the ridiculous climate change POLICIES the left is trying to pass by instead focusing on debating science that scientists don’t debate.
        Two things to always remember about science:
        1) One research paper (or one scientist), no matter how good, does not overturn scientific consensus.
        2) If you thought of a good argument while in the shower this morning against global warming, chances are near 100% that someone already thought about it, studied it, and published it.    Research rather then doing your own armchair thought experiments and you will be far better off.

        • Anonymous

          “1) One research paper (or one scientist), no matter how good, does not overturn scientific consensus”
          First off consensus is not science. Next, one paper or scientist most certainly can overturn so called “concensus’,  if it is right.

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OLKR3A5PPIEHCG2HRJOGOOYWUY Joe

            I can tell immediately that you are not a scientist, or have studied any scientific discipline.   Science must be replicated, and that is done by more publications.  Plus, overall science suffers from something called Publication Bias…only be replication and additional research that adds to the body of evidence does science eventually converge upon a closer answer.   Even Einstein did not just suddenly overturn established science.  It took many years for his theories to be proven correct. 
            Secondly, don’t confuse the vernacular meaning of consensus with scientific consensus…scientific consensus means the existing body of established science….it’s not just a poll of scientists.

          • Anonymous

            “Joe 
            Oh man, what a zinger!   You sure told that guy you actually know nothing about!

            A Like 59 minutes ago in reply to airfr8er Take your own advice, Joe. mech engineering was m

          • Anonymous

            Bingo.

            And when the balance is thoroughly shifted against them they will switch and claim that science isn’t consensus, all it takes is one right paper to disprove everything!

            /which is incidentally true, but they lose points for not recognizing that fact until then. 

          • http://profiles.google.com/oatscarter Oats Carter

            In fact, the slightest omission of data can send this entire thing crashing down!!

          • http://profiles.google.com/oatscarter Oats Carter

            In fact, the slightest omission of data can send this entire thing crashing down!!

          • http://profiles.google.com/oatscarter Oats Carter

            There is a logical fallacy on appealing to numbers. Just because a lot of people believe in something, it doesn’t make it true.

          • http://profiles.google.com/oatscarter Oats Carter

            There is a logical fallacy on appealing to numbers. Just because a lot of people believe in something, it doesn’t make it true.

          • http://www.wordaroundthenet.com Christopher Taylor

            Yeah it absolutely can.  The nice thing about science, at least good science, is that the truth trumps falsehood, no matter how many idiots cling to it.

      • Lighthouse, successful liberal

        At least we know you think your intuition trumps science.

      • Bob Young

        Since last week there was consensus among “scientists” that anthropogenic global warming due to CO2 levels in the atmosphere was “settled” science, we can now assume that there is no need for further research and we can now reach a new consensus that the sun is the sole controlling factor in climate change. Or maybe we can look at it reasonably, eliminate the calls for political action or dramatic changes in our lifestyles, and say we do not have enough information to determine what is going to happen or why it will happen. Then we must demand that governments quit making decisions based on incomplete or false “scientific consensus”, and to reverse the laws, agreements, and changes that have been made in the name of this false god.  It is time for the “scientific community” to go back to the days when a scientific method was mandatory, data and experimental results that could not be reproduced were assumed to be in error, and we called skeptics scientists, not deniers. I hope we can forgive those in and out of the scientific community who pushed their political agenda forward at the expense of science and the scientists who only wanted honesty and integrity in scientific discovery. I also hope that all who were at the center of this whose actions were less than honest are given the same treatment as they gave those who would not accept their false premise.

    • http://www.wordaroundthenet.com Christopher Taylor

      Yeah this isn’t the death knell for alarmist climate change hysteria, but its a serious blow.  That’s why its being largely ignored by the press and they tried so hard to prevent the study from even being done.

      • JoeBrit

        Well. maybe the science writers read the Nature.com interpretation of the CERN CLOUD finding and agree that it said nothing about global warming. They also probably took note that it was a synthetic chambered experiment that may have questionable generalization to the real atmosphere and had small effect. For example, the greenhouse effects of CO2 have been replicated numerous times since 1900, in fact is done every day in high school chemistry experiments, but is persistently overlooked by the deniers.

        It is like the deniers are Waiting for Godot, and they think they have found Him.

      • Anonymous

        I think the vigor with which they go after this research (and the poor researchers) will show just how big a threat they view this new finding. 

        /claiming the sun affects climate on earth is no different than saying you supported the holocaust.

  • JoeBrit

    What’s missing here? There’s no connection made between cosmic rays, the sun, and global warming.

    No, a new study does not show cosmic-rays are connected to global warming

    “The way some of the media report on climate change can be simply stunning. For example, an opinion piece in The Financial Post has the headline “New, convincing evidence indicates global warming is caused by cosmic rays and the sun — not humans”.

    There’s only one problem: that’s completely wrong. In reality the study shows nothing of the sort. The evidence, as far as the limitations of the experiment go (that’s important, see below), do not show any effect of cosmic rays on global warming, and say nothing at all about the effect humans are having on the environment.”

    http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/08/31/no-a-new-study-does-not-show-cosmic-rays-are-connected-to-global-warming/

    • JoeBrit

      A couple of more interesting paragraphs which enlighten just what we are dealing with here.
       
      ”
      So why did the Financial Post run with a headline that says the exact opposite of what the study actually found? They’re not alone, either; the Telegraph has a blog filled with similar dubious statements about the study (mostly quoting from the Financial Post blog, so take that into account). The claim they both make is that some of the science was suppressed, but that’s thin air. And it’s certainly not enough to state with certainty that cosmic rays effect our climate.
       
      And my irony gland explodes every time I hear a global warming denier say that the science has become politicized (as the Financial Post OpEd piece did, and as Rick Perry does). Ya think? The problem isn’t the politization of global warming (since by its very nature the changing climate affects everyone, and is therefore a concern of politics), it’s the attacks on the science based on politics.”

      • http://www.cavalierx.com CavalierX

        You’re just stuck on stupid with that Financial Post thing, aren’t you? Are you accusing them of changing the numbers and findings in the study itself now?

      • http://www.cavalierx.com CavalierX

        You’re just stuck on stupid with that Financial Post thing, aren’t you? Are you accusing them of changing the numbers and findings in the study itself now?

      • http://www.cavalierx.com CavalierX

        You’re just stuck on stupid with that Financial Post thing, aren’t you? Are you accusing them of changing the numbers and findings in the study itself now?

      • http://www.cavalierx.com CavalierX

        You’re just stuck on stupid with that Financial Post thing, aren’t you? Are you accusing them of changing the numbers and findings in the study itself now?

      • http://www.cavalierx.com CavalierX

        You’re just stuck on stupid with that Financial Post thing, aren’t you? Are you accusing them of changing the numbers and findings in the study itself now?

      • http://www.patriotpost.com bthewolf

        When you can post some actual science that proves Man Made Global Warming, we’ll accept your BS.

        • Lighthouse, wealthy liberal

          Your demand for “proof” reveals the shortfall in your critical capacity.

          The fact is that there’s way more evidence that points to a man-made effect on the atmosphere, than there is evidence that refutes that humans are the cause.

          Just like there’s way more evidence that shows evolution as the way the world works, rather than a biblical explanation, some people will remain faithful and demand proof god *doesn’t* exist, when that proof is ubiquitous.

          • http://www.thepiratescove.us/ William_Teach

            Yet, you failed to post any. Why is that?

            CO2 is a minor variable in climate. It is a trace gas necessary for life on earth. The effects of the Sun, water vapor, and natural processes are all the biggest things when it comes to climate. And, if your pet cult’s theory about greenhouses was correct, we would continue to see temperatures world wide go up. Yet, they aren’t.

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OLKR3A5PPIEHCG2HRJOGOOYWUY Joe

            Bold statements…unfortunately completely made up and they demonstrate your complete lack of understanding about real climate change science.  

          • http://www.thepiratescove.us/ William_Teach

            And your evidence on this is……?

          • http://www.thepiratescove.us/ William_Teach

            And your evidence on this is……?

          • http://www.thepiratescove.us/ William_Teach

            And your evidence on this is……?

          • http://www.thepiratescove.us/ William_Teach

            And your evidence on this is……?

          • JoeBrit

            It is possible that we have reached an equilibrium, but that’s no reason not to be very concerned about it. (And no I have no source or evidence about an equilibrium effect)

          • JoeBrit

            It is possible that we have reached an equilibrium, but that’s no reason not to be very concerned about it. (And no I have no source or evidence about an equilibrium effect)

          • Anonymous

            Lighthouse, wealthy liberal

            Wealthy? You know, must people here have seen your 800sqft shack, right? And don’t get me started on your pos plane.

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OLKR3A5PPIEHCG2HRJOGOOYWUY Joe

            Oh man, what a zinger!   You sure told that guy you actually know nothing about!

          • Anonymous

            I know quite a bit about jeff, Joe. It seems the one who knows nothing is….you.

          • http://www.wordaroundthenet.com Christopher Taylor

            Yeah proof, what an alien concept to science.

          • http://www.wordaroundthenet.com Christopher Taylor

            Yeah proof, what an alien concept to science.

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OLKR3A5PPIEHCG2HRJOGOOYWUY Joe

          There is a ton of science out there…why do you just keep pretending it doesn’t exist?  It doesn’t mean admitting defeat to the leftists you know.
          http://skeptoid.com/blog/2011/06/15/i-global-warming-skeptic/

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OLKR3A5PPIEHCG2HRJOGOOYWUY Joe

          There is a ton of science out there…why do you just keep pretending it doesn’t exist?  It doesn’t mean admitting defeat to the leftists you know.
          http://skeptoid.com/blog/2011/06/15/i-global-warming-skeptic/

      • http://www.patriotpost.com bthewolf

        When you can post some actual science that proves Man Made Global Warming, we’ll accept your BS.

    • http://www.cavalierx.com CavalierX

      “What’s missing here? There’s no connection made between cosmic rays, the sun, and global warming.”
       
      What’s missing is, apparently, reading comprehension.

      • http://www.thepiratescove.us/ William_Teach

        True. Also what is missing is an apparent 1st grade knowledge of how the universe works from the Warmists. They act like the Sun has zero influence on the climate. Apparently, mankind was able to change the climate over the 4.5 billion years before mankind existed quite a bit.

        • JoeBrit

          Not true Teach, and you know it. There are many factors involved in climate and temperature. The greenhouse gas theory just questions the incremental involvement of greenhouse gases on global warming, which over the past hundred years is calculated to be 1-1.7 degrees. The climate hoax proponents say that burning fossil fuels over that time period had nothing to do with it. But they have never shown that to be the case. And this study on cosmic rays does not do the trick, unless you’re gullible.

          • http://www.thepiratescove.us/ William_Teach

            We don’t have to show that the burning of fossil fuels (I know you will never answer, but, you do not own or drive a car, take a fossil fueled bus or plane, and have gone to a completely carbon neutral lifestyle, right?) is causing most or all of the warming perceived from the end of a cool period. It is incumbent upon you to provide hard, factual irrefutable evidence.

            The thing is, Joe, your side is not simply saying “hey, I wonder if mankinds output of greenhouse gases is having an effect.” What your side is saying is that Mankind’s output of greenhouse gases, use of energy, not hugging trees enough, etc, is the only thing that has caused the climate to warm. There is no “wondering”, you’re making a bold statement that it is only man’s fault. Despite billions of years of evidence to the contrary. Despite climate being complicated. Despite nature putting out more greenhouse gases by far over man. Despite noticable cooling/flatlining temps. Despite sea rise not being anything more than usual for the past 7,000 years post glacial period. And despite the majoriy of Warmists never practicing what they preach.

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OLKR3A5PPIEHCG2HRJOGOOYWUY Joe

             Strawman again.   Read the real science rather than opinion pieces.   Climate scientists do not say “Mankind’s output of greenhouse gases, use of energy, not hugging trees
            enough, etc, is the only thing that has caused the climate to warm.”   Politic rejects like Al Gore might say that, and they are as guilty of lying as you are. 

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OLKR3A5PPIEHCG2HRJOGOOYWUY Joe

             Strawman again.   Read the real science rather than opinion pieces.   Climate scientists do not say “Mankind’s output of greenhouse gases, use of energy, not hugging trees
            enough, etc, is the only thing that has caused the climate to warm.”   Politic rejects like Al Gore might say that, and they are as guilty of lying as you are. 

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OLKR3A5PPIEHCG2HRJOGOOYWUY Joe

             Strawman again.   Read the real science rather than opinion pieces.   Climate scientists do not say “Mankind’s output of greenhouse gases, use of energy, not hugging trees
            enough, etc, is the only thing that has caused the climate to warm.”   Politic rejects like Al Gore might say that, and they are as guilty of lying as you are. 

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OLKR3A5PPIEHCG2HRJOGOOYWUY Joe

             Strawman again.   Read the real science rather than opinion pieces.   Climate scientists do not say “Mankind’s output of greenhouse gases, use of energy, not hugging trees
            enough, etc, is the only thing that has caused the climate to warm.”   Politic rejects like Al Gore might say that, and they are as guilty of lying as you are. 

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OLKR3A5PPIEHCG2HRJOGOOYWUY Joe

          “They act like the Sun has zero influence on the climate.”
          Strawman

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OLKR3A5PPIEHCG2HRJOGOOYWUY Joe

          “They act like the Sun has zero influence on the climate.”
          Strawman

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OLKR3A5PPIEHCG2HRJOGOOYWUY Joe

          “They act like the Sun has zero influence on the climate.”
          Strawman

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OLKR3A5PPIEHCG2HRJOGOOYWUY Joe

          “They act like the Sun has zero influence on the climate.”
          Strawman

          • http://www.thepiratescove.us/ William_Teach

            Then you haven’t been paying attention to the debate over the past 20 years.

          • http://www.thepiratescove.us/ William_Teach

            Then you haven’t been paying attention to the debate over the past 20 years.

          • http://www.thepiratescove.us/ William_Teach

            Then you haven’t been paying attention to the debate over the past 20 years.

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OLKR3A5PPIEHCG2HRJOGOOYWUY Joe

            Kindly provide a link to a paper where a climate scientist has stated that the sun has zero influence on the climate.

          • http://www.wordaroundthenet.com Christopher Taylor

            Kindly provide a link to a paper where a climate scientist has stated that the sun has zero influence on the climate.

            Read the IPCC 2001 report which denied the sun was having any effect on the warming.

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OLKR3A5PPIEHCG2HRJOGOOYWUY Joe

            Not sure why I bother….all my comments have been flagged for review, although you guys can call me dumbass all you want without being flagged.
            Christopher, please read what I wrote!!   I said climate, in response to William who also used the word CLIMATE…..then you switched to using the term WARMING. Do you understand the difference?

          • Anonymous

            To the whiny child, “Joe” below:

            Not sure why I bother….all my comments have been flagged for review,

             
            Then why DO you bother?  Take it as a hint we don’t want you here and just leave.  Either man up and just accept that this community is finally policing itself, or go away.
             
            I can’t speak for everyone (and recall it takes several different people flagging a post for it to disapear), but I flagged all your posts when it became obvious you were just another punk.  You started off ok, but as the day wore on, you started to launch repeated personal attacks against Teach, got more and more snotty, whined about supposed “censorhip” of leftist posters, and finally you started to stand up for both Joebrit/Shergald and Lighthouse/Pete/Jefferey Soldau.  (both guys are known trolls and poor excuses for human beings….you claim to have been lurking for four years, so you should have known that.)  After that, I concluded that you were just another troll who was more interested in causing trouble than actual discussion.  So I flagged you.  Clearly, I was not the only one.
             
            I suspect you should say goodbye to this post too, son.
             

          • http://www.wordaroundthenet.com Christopher Taylor

            Kindly provide a link to a paper where a climate scientist has stated that the sun has zero influence on the climate.

            Read the IPCC 2001 report which denied the sun was having any effect on the warming.

    • http://www.cavalierx.com CavalierX

      “What’s missing here? There’s no connection made between cosmic rays, the sun, and global warming.”
       
      What’s missing is, apparently, reading comprehension.

    • http://www.cavalierx.com CavalierX

      “What’s missing here? There’s no connection made between cosmic rays, the sun, and global warming.”
       
      What’s missing is, apparently, reading comprehension.

    • http://www.patriotpost.com bthewolf

      Oh look an opinion piece! (it’s a blog not an actual article), and it’s written by an astronomer not a climatologist!! 

      Maybe you should take your own advice about bias!

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OLKR3A5PPIEHCG2HRJOGOOYWUY Joe

         Because an astronomer would have nothing intelligent to say about cosmic rays. 

    • http://www.thepiratescove.us/ William_Teach

      So, you just complained about using an opinion piece, and then you use….an opinion piece to attempt to debunk the research? That’s more f*cked up than normal even for you, Joe.

      • JoeBrit

        I did not debunk the research, only the premature political interpretation it is being given. As such, it is a false alarm if you actually expected this research to prove the hoax theory.

        Tell me. As there have been similar repeated experiments in chambers, closed containers, showing that CO2 can trap heat from the sun going back to 1900, which have been debunked by the hoax theorists, why do you now accept a similar experimental finding just because it is from CERN, even if its conclusions are being overinterpreted, at least by political writers.

        • http://www.cavalierx.com CavalierX

          “I did not debunk the research”

          Well, that’s certainly true at least.

        • http://www.thepiratescove.us/ William_Teach

          CO2 an trap heat, yes. But, there comes a point where it’s affects are minimal, and it is still only a minor driver of climate. We had warmer periods over the past 7,000 years post glaciation period that had lower CO2 levels. And, prior to your pet cult’s hypothesis, a rise in CO2 followed a rise in temperature, not visa versa.

          • http://www.wordaroundthenet.com Christopher Taylor

            The problem is CO2 doesn’t trap heat as much as thought in the 80s when the research was first being done, and what’s more the lab tests turned out to be woefully inadequate to describe real world atmospheric effects.  Scientists are backing off the greenhouse effect as a primary climate driver, admitting it doesn’t work like they thought it did.

          • http://www.wordaroundthenet.com Christopher Taylor

            The problem is CO2 doesn’t trap heat as much as thought in the 80s when the research was first being done, and what’s more the lab tests turned out to be woefully inadequate to describe real world atmospheric effects.  Scientists are backing off the greenhouse effect as a primary climate driver, admitting it doesn’t work like they thought it did.

          • http://www.wordaroundthenet.com Christopher Taylor

            The problem is CO2 doesn’t trap heat as much as thought in the 80s when the research was first being done, and what’s more the lab tests turned out to be woefully inadequate to describe real world atmospheric effects.  Scientists are backing off the greenhouse effect as a primary climate driver, admitting it doesn’t work like they thought it did.

          • http://www.wordaroundthenet.com Christopher Taylor

            The problem is CO2 doesn’t trap heat as much as thought in the 80s when the research was first being done, and what’s more the lab tests turned out to be woefully inadequate to describe real world atmospheric effects.  Scientists are backing off the greenhouse effect as a primary climate driver, admitting it doesn’t work like they thought it did.

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OLKR3A5PPIEHCG2HRJOGOOYWUY Joe

             Wow.  You are a walking example of the Dunning-Kruger effect.   Your understanding of climate science is so faulted that you can’t even begin to see your own errors in reasoning.   Climate change is not incompatible with conservatism you know.
            http://skeptoid.com/blog/2011/06/15/i-global-warming-skeptic/

          • http://www.thepiratescove.us/ William_Teach

            So, first you whined about science, and then you you made the issue political. Which it is.

            Unlike you, my eyes were opened. Perhaps you should spend less time at far left kook sites and more time reading all the research into the issue.

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OLKR3A5PPIEHCG2HRJOGOOYWUY Joe

            Yo Bill…..if you actually read the freaking link you would see that it is not a far left site at all.  Meanwhile all your blog entries link to opinion pieces and articles that talk about research and are never primary sources.

          • JoeBrit

            “effects are minimal?”

            But we are talking about a minimal (small, really) effect: 1.0-1.7 degrees in a hundred years.

          • JoeBrit

            “effects are minimal?”

            But we are talking about a minimal (small, really) effect: 1.0-1.7 degrees in a hundred years.

        • Anonymous

          Oh, yeah, closed chambers = global climate alright…

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OLKR3A5PPIEHCG2HRJOGOOYWUY Joe

         I’ve  lost count of your lies.    Phil Plait’s blog entry does not debunk the research….he points out that the right-wing echo chamber has completely misinterpreted it.

  • Anonymous

    The TRUTH, The FACTS, REALITY

    …name three things the lunatic-left d-cRAT socialists fear. 

    They will now double-down on their lies to protect the goracle’s massive multi-million dollar income from his promotion of total and complete agw BS.

  • Anonymous

    The TRUTH, The FACTS, REALITY

    …name three things the lunatic-left d-cRAT socialists fear. 

    They will now double-down on their lies to protect the goracle’s massive multi-million dollar income from his promotion of total and complete agw BS.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OLKR3A5PPIEHCG2HRJOGOOYWUY Joe
    • JoeBrit

      I told them, and also referred them to a Nature.com article which interpreted this very technical, and hard to comprehend (for the nonscientist) experiment.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OLKR3A5PPIEHCG2HRJOGOOYWUY Joe

    The problem with the lot of you is that you refuse to even listen to real climate change science because it has been completely co-opted by lefty alarmists….but they’re wrong too.   http://skeptoid.com/blog/2011/06/15/i-global-warming-skeptic/

  • JoeBrit

    Well, I came back just to find out how many of my posts were censored, flagged, and deleted. The rest of you will just have to accept the right wing political truths, whatever it is. Afterall if Perry has become a global climate denier, and he is now your best bet for 2012, what can you do.

  • JoeBrit

    This story received 81 comments but only 56 comments are showing. May we conclude that the Deniers won the battle. By censoring contrary knowledge, they have proven conclusively that manmade global warming is a hoax. Congratulations.

  • Anonymous

    The science is far too settled to actually, you know, test it. 

  • Anonymous

    But I have to ask to our resident warmers: if maintaining your faith requires you deny that the *sun* affects the temperature on earth, is it really worth it?

  • Anonymous

    I think you are investing rather a lot of hope in one study which shows cosmic rays influence the rate of nucleation. It’s about an order of magnitude or more less than the observed rate. (Ignoring for the moment that nucleation is only the first step in cloud formation).

    Second problem is that this isn’t going to get round recent global warming. The image shows cosmic ray data since 1958. There is no discernible trend, the variation due to the solar cycle is massive compared to any other trend. Yet since the late 70s we have seen an increase in global temperature.

    • http://www.patriotpost.com bthewolf

      Well until 1995 at least when temps leveled off and may even be falling! This study just shows that there is far more to  climate change than CO2. But then we’ve pointing that out for years. This study while not definitive is too small scale to prove a global effect, no doubt. But it proves we have too much still to learn before we shut down a coal plant because of a minor trace gas.

      • Anonymous

        “Well until 1995 at least when temps leveled off ”

        If what you say is correct why I don’t see that in the record? It shows every year since 2001 as warmer than 1995.

        GLOBAL Temperature Anomalies in .01 C (base period: 1951-1980)
        Year   
        1990    36 
        1991    35 
        1992    13 
        1993    13
        1994    23 
        1995    37 
        1996    29 
        1997    39 
        1998    56 
        1999    31 
        2000    33 
        2001    47 
        2002    56 
        2003    55 
        2004    48 
        2005    63 
        2006    55 
        2007    58 
        2008    44 
        2009    57 
        2010    63 

        In fact if you remove all the cyclic effects (the el nino/la nina and the solar cycle) and the volcanic contribution the trend is very obvious.

        tamino.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/adj1yr.jpg

        I agree about there being more to climate change than CO2 – that’s been in all the climate literature for the last 50 years. One thing is clear cosmic rays can’t account for recent warming – though it is important to understand the mechanism of nucleation in order to better  understand cloud formation.

        • http://www.wordaroundthenet.com Christopher Taylor

          There’s a couple problems with your chart.  First of all, the “normalization” is by computer modeling and estimates, so who knows how accurate it is, but I’ll grant you that for the sake of argument.

          The second one is that it uses only ground temperature monitors, which are not only too widely scattered to be much use across most of the planet (particularly the southern hemisphere, which has virtually none) but many have been proven to be improperly placed – close to heat sources in cities, for example.

          If you use satellite and weather balloon data, the picture is significantly different – and more accurate.  Which is why even guys like Michael “Piltdown” Mann admit there hasn’t been a warming trend for over ten years now.

          • Anonymous

            That IS the satellite data. 
            If I recall Mann didn’t say that – he said there WAS a warming trend, but it was just short of significance at the 95% confidence level and that you wouldn’t expect it to be statistically significant at that level for such a short interval.

          • http://www.patriotpost.com bthewolf

            No that’s not the satellite data look again the sources.

          • Anonymous

            That IS the satellite data. 
            If I recall Mann didn’t say that – he said there WAS a warming trend, but it was just short of significance at the 95% confidence level and that you wouldn’t expect it to be statistically significant at that level for such a short interval.

      • Anonymous

        “Well until 1995 at least when temps leveled off ”

        If what you say is correct why I don’t see that in the record? It shows every year since 2001 as warmer than 1995.

        GLOBAL Temperature Anomalies in .01 C (base period: 1951-1980)
        Year   
        1990    36 
        1991    35 
        1992    13 
        1993    13
        1994    23 
        1995    37 
        1996    29 
        1997    39 
        1998    56 
        1999    31 
        2000    33 
        2001    47 
        2002    56 
        2003    55 
        2004    48 
        2005    63 
        2006    55 
        2007    58 
        2008    44 
        2009    57 
        2010    63 

        In fact if you remove all the cyclic effects (the el nino/la nina and the solar cycle) and the volcanic contribution the trend is very obvious.

        tamino.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/adj1yr.jpg

        I agree about there being more to climate change than CO2 – that’s been in all the climate literature for the last 50 years. One thing is clear cosmic rays can’t account for recent warming – though it is important to understand the mechanism of nucleation in order to better  understand cloud formation.

  • Pingback: textile news

  • Pingback: garment business daily

  • Pingback: Denny Furukawa

  • Pingback: ecommerce website

  • Pingback: beach paintings

  • Pingback: online blackjack

  • Pingback: super stars

  • Pingback: gossip

  • Pingback: www.chase.com

  • Pingback: Soccer

  • Pingback: Rigid Six Pack Abdominals

  • Pingback: MPLS

  • Pingback: game fudge

  • Pingback: win ex back

  • Pingback: Event Marketing Agency

  • Pingback: mit der website geld verdienen

  • Pingback: A Nice Blog

  • Pingback: Los Angels Dental Crowns

  • Pingback: Android Apps

  • Pingback: all internet marketing

  • Pingback: whats my car worth

  • Pingback: http://www.ziki.com/en/abel-morin-22+265378/post/Buy-Facebook-Devotees-And-Increase-your-Small-business!+12820156

  • Pingback: Lindsy Grandi

  • Pingback: bodybuilding

  • Pingback: photo to painting

  • Pingback: Donovan

  • Pingback: porn sex hot sluts

  • Pingback: LiveJournal Blog

  • Pingback: TVonline

  • Pingback: mmoglider

  • Pingback: SBOBET

  • Pingback: 7M

  • Pingback: SBOBET

  • Pingback: Nitric Oxide Supplements

  • Pingback: steve

  • Pingback: best post workout supplements

  • Pingback: Beauty Blog

  • Pingback: sell my veyron

  • Pingback: 5-IAI usa

  • Pingback: best penny auction

  • Pingback: Weight Loss Blog

  • Pingback: Awesome bookmarks

  • Pingback: burger king menu

  • Pingback: Wood Blinds

  • Pingback: Information Technology

  • Pingback: all internet marketing

  • Pingback: Yellow Hoodie

  • Pingback: winscp download

  • Pingback: flv player

  • Pingback: desbloquear blackberry 9700

  • Pingback: all internet marketing

  • Pingback: Snowboard Boot Sizing

  • Pingback: Mike en Streaming Gratuit

  • Pingback: acana pacifica dog

  • Pingback: online payday loans

  • Pingback: website design norwich

  • Pingback: make money online

  • Pingback: Penis Extender

  • Pingback: seattle seo

  • Pingback: The Waggoners Trucking

  • Pingback: all internet marketing

  • Pingback: http://online-electronic-store.com/samsung-ln46c750-46-inch-1080p-3d-lcd-hdtv-black-7049/

  • Pingback: classic cars for sale

  • Pingback: plastic ice rink

  • Pingback: sex toys

  • Pingback: Renters Insurance

  • Pingback: Perth web design

  • Pingback: Alfred Johnson quantum international

  • Pingback: Edheads

  • Pingback: Future Steel Buildings

  • Pingback: Future Steel Buildings

  • Pingback: Random Chat with Strangers

  • Pingback: Culinary Schools in New York

  • Pingback: Top songs of 2011

  • Pingback: best combi boiler

  • Pingback: qld solar panel

  • Pingback: Snowboard Boot Sizing

  • Pingback: filme hd

  • Pingback: tactical accessories

  • Pingback: cremation urns

  • Pingback: maidstone solicitors

  • Pingback: Math Answers

  • Pingback: honeywell 50250 air purifier

  • Pingback: new skrillex songs

  • Pingback: acheter centrale vapeur

  • Pingback: Ovulation Symptoms

  • Pingback: blender philips

  • Pingback: newest mlm

  • Pingback: Cooking Games for Girls

  • Pingback: Al Johnson houston

  • Pingback: Search Beats

  • Pingback: Medway plumbing

  • Pingback: Ingersoll-Rand Air Compressor

  • Pingback: where can i buy a kindle

  • Pingback: xbox 360 cheapest price

  • Pingback: wedding ideas

  • Pingback: kent seo company

  • Pingback: montre gps garmin

  • Pingback: Sugar Daddy Dating

  • Pingback: meat slicers

  • Pingback: gifting program

  • Pingback: photo to painting

  • Pingback: Forum Grey Hat

  • Pingback: fly fishing trips

  • Pingback: Volare Chicago

  • Pingback: direct heating and cooling cape coral

  • Pingback: floor tiles

  • Pingback: affiliates

  • Pingback: CB Doctor

  • Pingback: free psv themes

  • Pingback: How To Resources

  • Pingback: lose weight fast and safe

  • Pingback: Nike City Court Girls White and Pink Trainers 431954

  • Pingback: car rental coupons

  • Pingback: min max me

  • Pingback: Classifieds

  • Pingback: law firm websites made affordable

  • Pingback: power trip card game

  • Pingback: painting company Apple Valley

  • Pingback: Calgary Dental

  • Pingback: supplements for tinnitus

  • Pingback: rift macros

  • Pingback: social bookmarking

  • Pingback: Latest Servers

  • Pingback: Consultant SEO Services

  • Pingback: lasik surgery

  • Pingback: montre hello kitty femme

  • Pingback: Muscle gain for each one

  • Pingback: My Blog Title

  • Pingback: ceramic watches

  • Pingback: Nopalea

  • Pingback: iPhone 5

  • Pingback: Best Nail Polish

  • Pingback: Jack3d Reviews

  • Pingback: poker werbung

  • Pingback: ultrasound therapy

  • Pingback: CPA Course

  • Pingback: Villa St Tropez

  • Pingback: MRR & PLR Pack

  • Pingback: precious metal price

  • Pingback: Log Cabins Loch Lomond

  • Pingback: Rental car coupon

  • Pingback: healthy breakfast ideas

  • Pingback: templebody

  • Pingback: Cat Condos

  • Pingback: Koeriersdienst Delft

  • Pingback: KPI Business Services

  • Pingback: treadmills

  • Pingback: bcaa supplements

  • Pingback: For Couples

  • Pingback: http://www.ceramicwatches.org/ceramic-watches-for-women/

  • Pingback: garmin 305

  • Pingback: Cyberdog

  • Pingback: disque dur interne sata

  • Pingback: new york limos

  • Pingback: gays

  • Pingback: free online games top 10

  • Pingback: keeping family healthy

  • Pingback: roofing

  • Pingback: Floor sanding

  • Pingback: uggs

  • Pingback: Green People

  • Pingback: raccoon repellent

  • Pingback: dog treats

  • Pingback: zumbido no ouvido

  • Pingback: the cash gifting expert

  • Pingback: melltartó

  • Pingback: free mac

  • Pingback: sewa mobil murah di bali

  • Pingback: sim only contracts

  • Pingback: Liebeszauber

  • Pingback: vélo enfant

  • Pingback: marketing

  • Pingback: duty free store online

  • Pingback: resume objective

  • Pingback: Recipes

  • Pingback: decodeur tnt

  • Pingback: paintless dent removal

  • Pingback: cheap ricoh aficio

  • Pingback: resume objective

  • Pingback: Capitec Bank Loans

  • Pingback: Laptop Repair

  • Pingback: Sacramento Computer Repair

  • Pingback: cover letter

  • Pingback: Cyber Monday Sharp LED TV

  • Pingback: mobile marketing

  • Pingback: el gordo

  • Pingback: your Avon

  • Pingback: bahamas charter flights

  • Pingback: Starving Students Moving

  • Pingback: Zits

  • Pingback: facebook proxy

  • Pingback: montre automatique homme

  • Pingback: Business Christmas cards

  • Pingback: free photoshop

  • Pingback: Win Prizes Playing Games FREE!!!

  • Pingback: retrofit projectors

  • Pingback: african mango extract

  • Pingback: MENS UNDERWEAR BLOG

  • Pingback: Zamunda

  • Pingback: leather steering WHeel covers

  • Pingback: Another Blog Title

  • Pingback: Hairpieces For Men

  • Pingback: commercial roofing

  • Pingback: Video Testimonials

  • Pingback: http://www.casquebluetooth.org/

  • Pingback: restful night sleep

  • Pingback: caisson basse

  • Pingback: Wedding Invitations

  • Pingback: Nikon D7000 Black Friday

  • Pingback: muscle gaining secrets ebook

  • Pingback: food containers

  • Pingback: commercial waterproofing

  • Pingback: dating sites

  • Pingback: marijuana addiction

  • Pingback: swiss dating service online

  • Pingback: low fat diet

  • Pingback: cheating men

  • Pingback: home improvements idea

  • Pingback: disque dur externe ssd

  • Pingback: tiket kereta

  • Pingback: stomatologie

  • Pingback: Pocket Folder Printing

  • Pingback: Affordable Wedding Invitations

  • Pingback: BEST TRADING STRATEGIES

  • Pingback: temporary health insurance

  • Pingback: womens ceramic watches

  • Pingback: LED Strip

  • Pingback: robot ménager

  • Pingback: dyshidrotic eczema

  • Pingback: how to get fans

  • Pingback: internet radio

  • Pingback: belly dance videos

  • Pingback: Another Blog Title

  • Pingback: robot multifonction

  • Pingback: Free Business leads

  • Pingback: rc planes on sale

  • Pingback: Wasp Nest Removal

  • Pingback: best pre workout supplements combo

  • Pingback: coffee break spanish

  • Pingback: iphone 5

  • Pingback: full seo service

  • Pingback: electric cigarette review

  • Pingback: security system

  • Pingback: scrapebox autoapprove list

  • Pingback: Thomas Hack

  • Pingback: coffee shop business plan

  • Pingback: survey

  • Pingback: flash player download

  • Pingback: décodeur tnt hd

  • Pingback: meilleur epilateur electrique

  • Pingback: machine a biere philips

  • Pingback: Wood Blinds

  • Pingback: brother cs6000i sewing machine

  • Pingback: tente de camping

  • Pingback: table à langer

  • Pingback: tables basses

  • Pingback: chicago montessori school

  • Pingback: Another Blog Title

  • Pingback: Black Friday Nikon D3100

  • Pingback: cutting tools

  • Pingback: Memphis Homes

  • Pingback: free cellphone service

  • Pingback: Baseball Halloween Costumes

  • Pingback: Abercrombie Coupons

  • Pingback: Teeth Whitening

  • Pingback: Schamanentreffen

  • Pingback: lit parapluie

  • Pingback: plaque a induction

  • Pingback: finance cars

  • Pingback: Affiliate Marketing

  • Pingback: certified nurse assistant school

  • Pingback: charity fundraising

  • Pingback: non-profit fundraising

  • Pingback: facebook fundraising

  • Pingback: Sack Barrow

  • Pingback: chanel ceramic watches

  • Pingback: cheerleader fundraising

  • Pingback: softball fundraising

  • Pingback: parc bebe pas cher

  • Pingback: high school fundraising

  • Pingback: the easy way to stop smoking by allen carr

  • Pingback: meeting singles online

  • Pingback: Nitric oxide supplements

  • Pingback: iphone 4s

  • Pingback: iphone 5

  • Pingback: fast seo results

  • Pingback: free shooting games

  • Pingback: cheap photo gifts

  • Pingback: poubelle automatique

  • Pingback: Todd cardin

  • Pingback: Todd cardin

  • Pingback: Todd cardin

  • Pingback: pirlanta

  • Pingback: siège auto bébé confort

  • Pingback: Mathew Patience

  • Pingback: gps moto

  • Pingback: http://www.imprimantewifi.org/

  • Pingback: tireuse a biere philips

  • Pingback: telephone fixe

  • Pingback: michael kors ceramic watch

  • Pingback: imprimante laser couleur

  • Pingback: site

  • Pingback: Used Cisco Equipment

  • Pingback: Electric Mopeds

  • Pingback: Get Instant Online Help Today

  • Pingback: Weston Werry

  • Pingback: My Blog Title

  • Pingback: Arnold Saracino

  • Pingback: Deal of the Day

  • Pingback: Naples Real Estate

  • Pingback: hemorrhoids treatment

  • Pingback: Forex Trading Course

  • Pingback: My Blog Title

  • Pingback: http://www.autoradiogps.fr/

  • Pingback: billige netbooks

  • Pingback: platine vinyle

  • Pingback: tablette graphique wacom

  • Pingback: Wedding Invitations

  • Pingback: cliquez ici

  • Pingback: barbecue electrique

  • Pingback: Diamond Hip Hop Jewelry

  • Pingback: four micro onde samsung

  • Pingback: Wholesale Gold Body Jewelry

  • Pingback: bague solitaire

  • Pingback: cliquez ici

  • Pingback: easy homemade gift ideas

  • Pingback: hachoir a viande

  • Pingback: Princess Leia Halloween Costume

  • Pingback: friteuse sans huile seb

  • Pingback: Desktop Laptops

  • Pingback: Shopping Deals Online

  • Pingback: PersonalRecipe is your leading global recipe supplier

  • Pingback: alliance diamant

  • Pingback: music download

  • Pingback: bureau enfant

  • Pingback: E Commerce

  • Pingback: solitaire diamant

  • Pingback: trancheuse a jambon manuelle

  • Pingback: the diet solution program review

  • Pingback: trancheuse

  • Pingback: aspirateur balai

  • Pingback: Massage Table Reviews

  • Pingback: cliquez ici

  • Pingback: echelles telescopiques

  • Pingback: pompe a biere

  • Pingback: reflex numerique nikon

  • Pingback: chaise de bureau

  • Pingback: brosse à dent électrique

  • Pingback: rasoir electrique

  • Pingback: browser based game

  • Pingback: Beat Generator Online

  • Pingback: quick chocolate recipes

  • Pingback: Wedding Invitations

  • Pingback: cliquez ici

  • Pingback: advantages of bilingualism

  • Pingback: White witch spells

  • Pingback: Online Driver Education California

  • Pingback: Real Estate

  • Pingback: Yellow Polarized Sunglasses

  • Pingback: chaise de bar

  • Pingback: Wedding Invitations

  • Pingback: lactancia

  • Pingback: Halloween Fancy Dress

  • Pingback: Partnerzusammenführung

  • Pingback: Magie

  • Pingback: David Lichtenstein

  • Pingback: venetian blinds

  • Pingback: Carpet Cleaning Roswell

  • Pingback: trampoline pas cher avec filet

  • Pingback: tania karma dla psow

  • Pingback: Electric Ohm Sunglasses

  • Pingback: White Doors

  • Pingback: webcam sex

  • Pingback: weight loss method

  • Pingback: interior doors

  • Pingback: forerunner305.fr

  • Pingback: Oxyelite Pro Side Effects

  • Pingback: accounting certificate programs

  • Pingback: bulk flowers

  • Pingback: how to trade forex

  • Pingback: About Diseases

  • Pingback: free deep backlink

  • Pingback: My Blog Title

  • Pingback: how to become anything

  • Pingback: mma self defense

  • Pingback: how to get long hair

  • Pingback: winter health tips

  • Pingback: Casio Watches Digital

  • Pingback: UK Dating

  • Pingback: chefs melbourne

  • Pingback: blinds Perth

  • Pingback: easiest language to learn for english speakers

  • Pingback: kindle 3g review

  • Pingback: BoilX Review

  • Pingback: men shoe chicago

  • Pingback: Aggregator

  • Pingback: traffic to site

  • Pingback: the tool shop

  • Pingback: amazon black friday deals

  • Pingback: Mini cooper pacman review

  • Pingback: Cheap Airport Lounges

  • Pingback: Velcro Badges

  • Pingback: free iphone5

  • Pingback: spy camera

  • Pingback: how to host minecraft server

  • Pingback: obagi reviews

  • Pingback: bookmark4you

  • Pingback: ownlook

  • Pingback: weight loss diet

  • Pingback: Contractors Accountants

  • Pingback: short term car insurance

  • Pingback: My Technology Website

  • Pingback: medical supplies online

  • Pingback: accountants

  • Pingback: Baby Photo Contest

  • Pingback: buy twitter followers

  • Pingback: dvd movies sale

  • Pingback: Another Blog Title

  • Pingback: buy a logo

  • Pingback: Play Bubble Trouble Shooter

  • Pingback: aprender ingles gratis

  • Pingback: real estate

  • Pingback: Boost Your Social Popularity

  • Pingback: The best dual sim android mobile phones

  • Pingback: How To Trade Stocks With Great Accuracy

  • Pingback: Car Transporters

  • Pingback: cellularcountry

  • Pingback: http://mgmtwitter.com

  • Pingback: cellular country

  • Pingback: Buy & Sell Services, £5 to £100 - UK

  • Pingback: publicidad on line

  • Pingback: Datinghelp

  • Pingback: find a lawyer

  • Pingback: .

  • Pingback: http://www.howmuchdotheyweigh.com/jasmine-guy-weight/

  • Pingback: Online dating

  • Pingback: John Stevens

  • Pingback: business card printing

  • Pingback: Pre order hitman Absolution

  • Pingback: Pre order Resident evil operation raccoon city

  • Pingback: cellulite cream

  • Pingback: iowa city houses for sale

  • Pingback: clear skin max

  • Pingback: best new singer

  • Pingback: how do i become a paralegal

  • Pingback: mini storage

  • Pingback: investor relations firm

  • Pingback: diet pills best

  • Pingback: best diet pill

  • Pingback: dubstep tshirt

  • Pingback: affiliate marketing services

  • Pingback: Aventura Bachata Group

  • Pingback: togel

  • Pingback: fat loss 4 idiots book

  • Pingback: meal replacement shake

  • Pingback: SEO LOS ANGELES

  • Pingback: professional writing services

  • Pingback: surveillance software

  • Pingback: Los Angeles SEO

  • Pingback: sam

  • Pingback: flats in ooty

  • Pingback: Hotforex

  • Pingback: gold quote

  • Pingback: Scott Tucker

  • Pingback: Scott Tucker

  • Pingback: Scott Tucker

  • Pingback: Bredbånd

  • Pingback: Middletown Real Estate

  • Pingback: taruhan bola

  • Pingback: fable 4

  • Pingback: SEO

  • Pingback: Pantyhose

  • Pingback: ab wheel

  • Pingback: Physio

  • Pingback: Scott Tucker

  • Pingback: seo montreal

  • Pingback: Plastic Surgery Internet Marketing

  • Pingback: International Drive Orlando Hotels

  • Pingback: Currency Trading

  • Pingback: coin collecting

  • Pingback: Another Blog Title

  • Pingback: ?

  • Pingback: bath resurfacing

  • Pingback: Thanks

  • Pingback: tea kettle

  • Pingback: Jump higher in sports

  • Pingback: Best Tips for Golf Drives

  • Pingback: NYC Event Planners

  • Pingback: sports

  • Pingback: My Blog Title

  • Pingback: yahoo japan auction

  • Pingback: http://onlinet1.com/my-category.html

  • Pingback: cheap traffic

  • Pingback: knit hand warmers

  • Pingback: Buy Facebook Fans

  • Pingback: urban clothing

  • Pingback: buy facebook likes

  • Pingback: Kalipayan

  • Pingback: Utah Home Elevator Company

  • Pingback: lethal commission

  • Pingback: tractor supply coupon policy

  • Pingback: Roqzine

  • Pingback: great northern popcorn

  • Pingback: Boca Raton Real Estate

  • Pingback: free emoticons

  • Pingback: ipad 2

  • Pingback: Empower Network Bonus

  • Pingback: Deal Hoster

  • Pingback: My Blog Title

  • Pingback: walk in wardrobe

  • Pingback: Jamestown OH roof repair

  • Pingback: Camden Town - London

  • Pingback: Optimizacija spletnih strani

  • Pingback: sea containers

  • Pingback: …

  • Pingback: oxyhives

  • Pingback: Local Deal Finder

  • Pingback: Sports On Christmas

  • Pingback: top worldwide escorts

  • Pingback: live girls

  • Pingback: Paperli

  • Pingback: Fresno architect

  • Pingback: premier wealth systems

  • Pingback: low calorie desserts

  • Pingback: Make Money Online

  • Pingback: Prestashop Templates

  • Pingback: New News

  • Pingback: SEO costs

  • Pingback: Chiropractor in Nashville

  • Pingback: picture into painting

  • Pingback: Hippie Clothes

  • Pingback: roofing tampa

  • Pingback: Sativa

  • Pingback: wildcard certificates

  • Pingback: manual handling training

  • Pingback: Find me a girl – Online Dating and Love

  • Pingback: Night Cream

  • Pingback: "ROI Unlimited"

  • Pingback: search engine optimization

  • Pingback: Cheap Hotels in Key West

  • Pingback: webcam sex

  • Pingback: AKO

  • Pingback: Suntrust Online Logon

  • Pingback: Sportnahrung

  • Pingback: LEGO Store

  • Pingback: windows 8 tablet

  • Pingback: best traffic exchange

  • Pingback: ECN Broker

  • Pingback: sacramento personal injury attorney

  • Pingback: electric curtain tracks

  • Pingback: fiji activities

  • Pingback: bodybuilding software

  • Pingback: redkow bookmark wedding

  • Pingback: ipad 2

  • Pingback: …….

  • Pingback: South Africa Wedding

  • Pingback: tax refunds uk

  • Pingback: Family Law Attorney Carlsbad

  • Pingback: reprx

  • Pingback: classified ads

  • Pingback: business card maker

  • Pingback: hypnotist Chicago

  • Pingback: website for accountants

  • Pingback: grocery coupons printable

  • Pingback: unmetered server

  • Pingback: Prsteny

  • Pingback: coupons

  • Pingback: Zebra skin

  • Pingback: skinny girl margarita recipe

  • Pingback: handyman

  • Pingback: cheap embroidery

  • Pingback: fulfilment

  • Pingback: forex

  • Pingback: long distance moving

Advertisement
Featured Video

Who Is Brett Kimberlin?

php developer india
Premium Right Ads
Blogads Right
Previous Features

Ads

The Best Quotes From “Ten Prayers God Always Says Yes To”
Hey Lady Gaga, Kids Have a Time-Tested Answer for Bullies: Punch Them in the Mouth
Seven Differences Between Winners And Losers
The Problem With The Occupy Wall Street Generation
The 20 Most Influential Black Republicans
Talking With Chuck D. From Public Enemy About Farrakhan, Air America’s Failure, And Open Borders
Advertisement
User Info
Features
Archives Best of RWN Humor John Hawkins Interviews Quotes Special to RWN