A Russian coldenist
speaks:
Astrophysics knows two solar activity cycles, of 11 and 200 years. Both are caused by changes in the radius and area of the irradiating solar surface. The latest data, obtained by Habibullah Abdusamatov, head of the Pulkovo Observatory space research laboratory, say that Earth has passed the peak of its warmer period, and a fairly cold spell will set in quite soon, by 2012. Real cold will come when solar activity reaches its minimum, by 2041, and will last for 50-60 years or even longer.
...
The temperature of the troposphere, the lowest and densest portion of the atmosphere, does not depend on the concentration of greenhouse gas emissions—a point proved theoretically and empirically. True, probes of Antarctic ice shield, taken with bore specimens in the vicinity of the Russian research station Vostok, show that there are close links between atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide and temperature changes. Here, however, we cannot be quite sure which is the cause and which the effect.
Sorokhtin makes some other points, such that the CO2 concentration might affect atmospheric volatility but not temperature, and that the oft-mentioned CO2 lag in historical temperature cycles may be explained by greater CO2 emissions from warmer oceans.
I found this
gray-body emissivity argument interesting as well. Is it even possible for CO2 to warm the planet?
Overall, I have to be a bit suspicious of the climate change industry. Yes, there are lots of scientists involved, but there are lots of ideologically-driven environmentalists involved too, and billions in funding are at stake. It still bothers me that James Hansen once worked on a project that ascribed global
cooling to manmade pollutants; that really makes climate change activism look like a solution in search of a problem.
Guess we'll find out who's right in a few years.
