Cosmic Rays Linked to Ozone depletion/ozone Hole......Can also be Linked to Climate Changes

[BethesdaWX]

Peer Reviewed Paper Cited by 16: http://prl.aps.org/a...102/i11/e118501

"This Letter reports reliable satellite data in the period of 1980–2007 covering two full 11-yr cosmic ray (CR) cycles, clearly showing the correlation between CRs and ozone depletion, especially the polar ozone loss (hole) over Antarctica. The results provide strong evidence of the physical mechanism that the CR-driven electron-induced reaction of halogenated molecules plays the dominant role in causing the ozone hole. Moreover, this mechanism predicts one of the severest ozone losses in 2008–2009 and probably another large hole around 2019–2020, according to the 11-yr CR cycle."

© 2009 The American Physical Society

It has been widely known that photochemical mechanisms invloving GCR's can be linked to changes in Ozone depletion, and, as if it weren't enough, Depletion in Ozone has also been theorized to have had a Substantial Role in the Climate changes seen

Recently Published, with Full Data-Code Available.

Note these are Pro-AGW/clean energy Scientists

http://wattsupwithth...ng-04-22-11.pdf

http://wattsupwithth...ngsom110422.pdf

So indeed very interesting. This would make some sense regarding the Changes in Global Temps... more-so than Hansen's Mt Pinatubo Claim

[BethesdaWX]

This Could offer some explanation as to why GCR's have correlated to Temps somewhat....even excluding Cloud Cover in the Tropics. Hoping we can make some headway here.

Since satellite OBS cannot be discredited, this has boosted my confidence level.

[skierinvermont]

It's been known for a long time that solar affects ozone which affects climate. The effect is small.

This is not the traditional GCR--> cloud mechanism that others have proposed but which has been squarely disproven both theoretically and empirically.

Also Hansen's statement re Pinatubo makes perfect sense and is a pretty straightforward fact.

[BethesdaWX]

It's been known for a long time that solar affects ozone which affects climate. The effect is small.

This is not the traditional GCR--> cloud mechanism that others have proposed but which has been squarely disproven both theoretically and empirically.

Also Hansen's statement re Pinatubo makes perfect sense and is a pretty straightforward fact.

This is Simply False, everything....A Giant Clusterf**k. I'll Refute you Below.

You need to provide sources that show this, and I'll Refute them with recent peer reviewed data, and basic knowledge/physics.

Skier statement 1.... No, the size of the effect is unknown, and recent models developed show you to be Wrong in circulation patterns effected globally, predominately in the SH... (linked)... Stike 1

Skier Statement 2... LOL How can it Be Disproven if we cannot even measure GCC in the First Place??? We have a Mechamism to GCC, but no measurements :lol: Strike 2

Skier Statement 3... Oh really? Lets see a Source... Its well known So2 has a resiliance time on forcing of 2 years....strike 3

Reflected Visible light cannot be picked up by Satellites that measure LW radiation..... thus it can not only contaminate a reading, but could be responsible for much of the warming seen.

The overall reflectance (albedo) of planet Earth is about 30 percent, meaning that about 30 percent of the incoming shortwave solar radiation is radiated back to space. If all clouds were removed, the global albedo would decrease to about 15 percent, and the amount of shortwave energy available for warming the planet surface would increase from 239 W/m² to 288 W/m² (

Hartmann 1994). However, the longwave radiation would also be affected, with 266 W/m² being emitted to space, compared to the present 234 W/m² (Hartmann 1994). The net effect of removing all clouds would therefore still be an increase in net radiation of about 17 W/m². So the global cloud cover has a clear overall cooling effect on the planet, even though the net effect of high and low clouds are opposite (see figure above). This is not a pure theoretical consideration, but is demonstrated by observations (see diagram below).