Did the Russian Scientist Get Global Warming Right First?

Other scientists from other countries were probably not under some of the same pressure ours were to only prove that man made global warming was fact.

Add to that if our scientists would lose credibility from peers, universities, and most of all those who funded them they would have a case for keeping their findings very skewed.

Habibullo Abdusamatov has been quoted a bit lately with this theory he also suggests that Mars & Pluto are warming.

His warming theory isn't new it was around in the 80's but was dropped because of a slight problem, the sun stopped cooling ~78 and hasn't since.

Much has be made of Mr Abdusamatov theory by the denier camp and his grandiose title "head of the space research laboratory at the St. Petersburg-based Pulkovo Observatory"

which was basically built in 1839 and rebuilt in the 50s and little work done since, whose largest optical telescope is 32in WOW I know a couple of serious amateur astronomers with telescopes that big. The second link below has a number of links to pulkovo, the first one is a picture of the main building which says it all!

Edit

jack_scar_action_hero : ho hum more pointless dribble about religion I guess if you don't actually have a point that makes sense, that the fall back of calling GW a belief is all thats left.

If a Russian scientist puts him self forward as an expert then he should be looked at, as should any scientist from either side of this argument. This Russian seems to be 'head' of a derelict building in the middle of nowhere, which hardly instils confidence he is a leading scientist.

Well you can't make statements like that in some countries.

The greenhouse effect is a 19th century theory that certain gasses retain heat on the earth. It's not the sort of theory that we can test, but in the current political climate in many countries, it is politically impossible to question it. God help anyone who provides proof that there isn't any greenhouse effect at all.

The temperature of the earth could be accounted for entirely by blackbody radiation if we use a different value for effective albedo than the accepted value.

We also know that the heat is transfered from the surface of the earth primarily by convection and that warming the atmosphere at different rates on different parts of the globe would accelerate the rate of convection in the atmosphere. Could it be that when the atmosphere absorbes IR radiation, it just causes the air to circulate faster?

I don't know - I'm amazed at the remarkable similarities in regional sub-climates between today and the MWP.

I can't predict the future any more than anyone, and I can't prove anything either way - nor can anyone else. My thoughts? I honestly suspect that we're repeating the MWP and that CO2 and aerosols have some effect but we're the olive, not the gin.

yes, maybe the russians first get it right. i also agree that they are the first ones because this issue became political in the US. but i think Americans are still advanced in climatology as it is obvious more and more missions are being prepared to study climate change and even study of other planets. Russians are really smart because they were the second ones who send a flying object in space (i think Germany was the first because the first rocket launched in space was launched in Germany). the data is quite convincing and if you are an innocent person reading it, you will really believe with the proof also shown in the table. good question, eh.

I have a couple of gripes with Abdusamatov's claims in this article. First with this paragraph:

He said an examination of ice cores from wells over three kilometers (1.5 miles) deep in Greenland and the Antarctic indicates that the Earth experienced periods of global warming even before the industrial age.

I guess they have straw men in Russia, too. I have yet to hear any climate scientist anywhere at any time say there was no pre-industrial global warming. Of course there was! We've had ice ages and interglacial periods. The questions right now are: Is this warming unprecedented? and Are we contributing to it?

My second gripe stems from this paragraph:

However, Abdusamatov insisted: "Ascribing 'greenhouse' effect properties to the Earth's atmosphere is not scientifically substantiated. Heated greenhouse gases, which become lighter as a result of expansion, ascend to the atmosphere only to give the absorbed heat away."

I'd be interested to hear Abdusamatov's explanation for how the Earth is warm enough to sustain life, then. Perhaps there's somewhat of a semantics issue, as a greenhouse is not entirely analogous to the Earth's atmosphere.

I have to go with Dan R on this one and attack the person personally because he doesn't agree with the consensus of true believers, and to the global warming religion he is a heretic. And I want to put another vote for Richard who just makes stuff up.

The day will come when the Church of global warming will show that humans need to not exist anymore and they will lead by example and remove themselves from this planet, and us non-believers will fallow suit.(maybe)

I think yes, the Russians did get it right. The sun does go through solar cycles. I want someone to explain this to me. I live in Columbus, OH and we have had more snow in the past 2 weeks than we have in the past 3-4 years. I don't agree with the whole idea of global warming. I think the whole thing is a bogus political argument that really shouldn't be brought up.

What I found the following passage very interesting:

Abdusamatov claimed that the upper layers of the world's oceans are - much to climatologists' surprise - becoming cooler, which is a clear indication that the Earth has hit its temperature ceiling already, and that solar radiation levels are falling and will eventually lead to a worldwide cold spell.

We are in a major La Nina, and these climatologists who claim they can predict the climate in 100 years, could not even predict this La Nina event last year. By the way La Ninas are not weather, they are climate.

Maybe they have. The left in this country have truly bungled this one. All the publicity will ultimately make the masses more critical of science which may end up being a very bad thing.