On the Front Lines of the Culture Wars

On the Front Lines of the Culture Wars


Why has there been almost nothing in the press about this global warming study?

If late novelist and screenwriter Michael Crichton had lived to write a follow-up to State of Fear, the plotline might well have gone like this: at a top-secret, state-of-the-art laboratory in Switzerland, scientists from 113 countries finally discover the true cause of “global warming.”

However, nobody wants to hear what they found.

But it’s not fiction and such a study exists — published by the prestigious Organisation Européenne pour la Recherche Nucléaire, which employs just under 2,400 full-time employees, as well as some 7,931 scientists and engineers representing 608 universities and research facilities and 113 nationalities — and runs the colossal Large Hadron Collider on the French-Swiss border. Odds are you’ve heard nothing about their study. What did these highly respected scientists find is causing global warming?

“It’s the sun, stupid,” writes James Delingpole in the British daily newspaper the Telegraph, one of the few media to publish the findings. “More specifically – as the Danish physicist Henrik Svensmark has long postulated – it’s the result of cosmic rays which act as a seed for cloud formation.

“The scientists working on the project are naturally euphoric: this is a major breakthrough which will not only overturn decades of misguided conjecture on so-called Man Made Global Warming but will spare the global economy trillions of dollars which might otherwise have been squandered on utterly pointless efforts to reduce anthropogenic CO2 emissions.”

But if these findings are so monumental, why has the news media been silent about this discovery? 

Because the findings are profoundly politically incorrect. Delingpole finds it absolutely fascinating that such an important study has been so completely suppressed — but he can see the massive political forces at work. 

What is this study he is talking about? ”The latest revelations from CERN over its landmark CLOUD experiment,” he explains.

CERN refers to the Organisation Européenne pour la Recherche Nucléaire, the European Organization for Nuclear Research, an international organization whose purpose is to operate the world’s largest particle physics laboratory is situated in the northwest suburbs of Geneva on the French–Swiss border. Established in 1954, the organization has twenty European member states. The term CERN is also used to refer to the laboratory itself.

Just what did CERN find?

According to the International Business Times, one of the few media to report on the study, the team of international scientists found a common link in global warming on Earth and the similar warming occurring on Mars, Jupiter, Triton, Neptune and Pluto — where there are few SUV or coal-fired power plants. The link? The cycles of the sun. 

“Global warming and climate change are phenomena that broke the bonds of scientific circles to emerge as a matter of debate between ‘believers’ and ‘skeptics,’” reported the Times. ”Countless studies validating and denying global warming have seen the light of the day, providing fodder for more, often somewhat bitter debates.

“Within the past month, Nobel Prize winner and leading climate change ‘alarmist’ Al Gore has called those who deny global warming akin to ‘racists,’ and ‘pseudo-scientists,’ and accused media of manipulating evidence about global warming,” reported the Times.

And that’s why so little has been reported about this study. Gore and his disciples have nurtured a group-think that makes the very idea that man is not cause of global warming absolutely untenable. After all, they have millions and millions of dollars invested in such schemes as “carbon trading” — built on the theory that carbon in the atmosphere is the cause of elevated temperatures worldwide.

But CERN has pokes a hole in Gore’s “established science.” CERN is the European entity that created and operates the colossal Large Hadron Collider, has now built a stainless steel chamber that precisely re-creates the Earth’s atmosphere. Research findings published by none other than CERN in the journal Nature hold that cosmic rays and the sun, not human activities, are responsible for global warming.

However, this could cost people like Gore their reputations. CERN’s discovery ”isn’t exactly what Gore would welcome right now,” notes the Times.

Scientist Lawrence Solomon explains the study’s significance:

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.

“So if it’s so great, why aren’t we hearing more about it?” asks Delingpole in the Telegraph. “Well, possibly because the Director General of CERN Rolf-Dieter Heuer would prefer it that way. Here’s how he poured cold water on the results in an interview with Die Welt Online:

I have asked the colleagues to present the results clearly, but not to interpret them. That would go immediately into the highly political arena of the climate change debate. One has to make clear that cosmic radiation is only one of many parameters.

The findings came from what is called the CLOUD experiment – Cosmics Leaving OUtdoor Droplets. It uses a cloud chamber to study the possible link between galactic cosmic rays and cloud formation. Based at the Proton Synchrotron at CERN, it is the first time a high-energy physics accelerator has been used to study atmospheric and climate science, explains Delingpole.

Scientist Nigel Calder was the first to smell a rat when he read Heuer’s comment, writes Delingpole. Calder notes:

CERN has joined a long line of lesser institutions obliged to remain politically correct about the man-made global warming hypothesis. It’s OK to enter “the highly political arena of the climate change debate” provided your results endorse man-made warming, but not if they support Svensmark’s heresy that the Sun alters the climate by influencing the cosmic ray influx and cloud formation.

The once illustrious CERN laboratory ceases to be a truly scientific institute when its Director General forbids its physicists and visiting experimenters to draw the obvious scientific conclusions from their results

Scientist Lubos Motl, too, detects a double standard:

One could perhaps understand if all scientists were similarly gagged and prevented from interpreting the results of their research in ways that could be relevant for policymaking.

However, the main problem is that many people who are trying to work on very different phenomena in the climate are not prevented from interpreting – and indeed, overinterpreting and misinterpreting – their results that are often less serious, less reliable, and less rigorous, perhaps by orders of magnitude, than the observations by the European Organization for Nuclear Research.

“Moreover,” writes Delingham, ”this sentence by Heuer, ‘One has to make clear that cosmic radiation is only one of many parameters’ is really a proof of his prejudice. Whether the cosmic radiation is just one player or the only relevant player or an important player or an unimportant player is something that this very research has been supposed to determine or help to determine.

“But then, as Solomon reminds us, this was never an experiment the scientific establishment wanted to happen in the first place.

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.

CLICK HERE to read more



Advertisement
Comments read comments(5)
post a comment
Andrew

posted September 2, 2011 at 10:39 am


What is the harm in polluting less? That is the big “demand” of climate-change proponents, so why does this make them “plotters”? What could the “agenda” of climate-change scientists be? It doesn’t make sense to talk about this mass environmentalist conspiracy, when the alleged “conspirators” have nothing to gain . Meanwhile, the “good guys” (the oil companies?) have billions of dollars in profits, potential lawsuits, reputations and more at stake.
Scientists are skeptical by definition, but even if the majority were wrong and man has nothing to do with global warming, wouldn’t you still want to breathe cleaner air, drink cleaner water, not have garbage in front of your house? We all benefit from these things, but if we believe this anti-global-warming propaganda, a very small group of people profit while the majority suffers. I think it’s clear the people fighting against climate change have more of a reason to lie/mislead than scientists who don’t have nearly the same financial/practical incentives.



report abuse
 

    Rob Kerby, Senior Editor

    posted September 2, 2011 at 11:28 am


    Your argument is “Who cares if they have lied to us if the result is less pollution?” Less pollution is not the result. As to the profit motive — it is massive. Those pushing for “carbon trading” have billions at stake in convincing governments that we are in the midst of a dire emergency and that carbon emissions must be limited immediately without further study — and the way to do it is to force by law corporations to buy and sell carbon credits. Note that the big polluters aren’t polluting less, they are just paying for the privilege, buying from non-polluters permission to keep polluting. And the carbon trading brokers — such as, yes, Al Gore, who has invested heavily in such — rake in millions in commissions on the trades. And, incidentally, you will be astonished at the thousands of scientists who are signatories to statements that global warming is not man-made — but that political correctness has just made it very dangerous for them professionally to speak up.



    report abuse
     

Gary W. Barkley

posted September 5, 2011 at 12:32 pm


There are too many adjectives praising the “unpublished” study for me to put any stock in the story. In my opinion, this article provides fodder for the radical nay sayers of global warming. Questions: who funded the study? Big oil? Big business? Major polluters around the globe? My suspicion is that those who pollute the most and who would lose the most if we moved away from our addiction to petroleum, and the well documented damage to the environment from CO2 that have provided the funds and incentives for the study.



report abuse
 

Kevin Hearle

posted September 6, 2011 at 2:30 am


Gw Barkley, Before you sharpen your pencil it might be a good idea to take a subscription to Nature or be a cheap skate and just put CERN CLOUD into your browser and read about it for yourself The work of Kirby et al is peer reviewed and published.



report abuse
 

Sherryl Nuckels

posted December 11, 2011 at 8:52 am


Can we all agree to Destroy the FED and Merge with Russia and Chine to become relevant again



report abuse
 

Post a Comment

By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.



Previous Posts

President Obama fails key test for Antichrists: confesses Jesus is Lord
President Barack Obama passed a key test Monday night in case anybody is worried that he is the Antichrist. Speaking at a campaign fundraiser at the House of Blues in Los Angeles, Obama was interrupted by a man identified as David Serrano who repeatedly yelled that "Jesus is God." As Se

posted 7:53:12pm Sep. 28, 2011 | read full post »

Michael Moore: America would welcome a fat president such as Chris Christie
Asked by Joy Behar onHeadline News whether America would vote for a "fat" candidate for President, controversial film-maker Michael Moore, who has never been accused of being too skinny, responded that most of America is fat and would probably identify with an overweight Commander-in-Chief. Histo

posted 10:27:30am Sep. 28, 2011 | read full post »

ACLU, Planned Parenthood combine to fight Mississippi constitutional amendment
Planned Parenthood and the American Civil Liberties Union have joined forces to create the pro-abortion “Mississippians for Healthy Families” with a goal of defeating a constitutional amendment limiting abortion in the Magnolia State. Christine Dhanagom of LifeSiteNews writes that "Yes on

posted 11:55:16am Sep. 27, 2011 | read full post »

Scientists tell pollsters religion and science not irreconcilable
Are there irreconcilable differences between faith and science? Not in the opinion of prominent scientists who participated in a five-year study by Rice University. Researchers there found that only a minority of scientists questioned at major research universities say that religion and scien

posted 3:13:07pm Sep. 23, 2011 | read full post »

Wikileaks: U.S. Embassy criticized Catholic influences on Poland
U.S. Embassy officials in Warsaw, Poland, under the Obama administration complained that Catholic Church doctrine is a major source of “homophobia” in the heavily Catholic country, according to diplomatic cables released by Wikileaks. The messages from the American embassy in Poland's capit

posted 3:51:00pm Sep. 08, 2011 | read full post »




Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.