Particles from space seed cloud formation and greenhouse

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on skepticism regarding the theory that particles from space influence cloud formation and climate change. Critics question the timing and historical evidence of such phenomena, suggesting that geological timescales make current effects seem unlikely. The role of solar magnetism and cosmic rays in cloud condensation is debated, with some arguing that terrestrial dust and aerosols from human activity may have a more significant impact. The complexity of cloud formation is highlighted, emphasizing that an increase in condensation nuclei does not necessarily lead to more cloud cover. Overall, the conversation underscores the need for a nuanced understanding of climate dynamics beyond simplistic correlations.
verdigris
Messages
118
Reaction score
0
I don't believe the cloud formation by particles from space idea because why would they be doing this now (we'd have to be unlucky given geological timescales) and why isn't there evidence of this in the past.
 
Earth sciences news on Phys.org
verdigris said:
I don't believe the cloud formation by particles from space idea because why would they be doing this now (we'd have to be unlucky given geological timescales) and why isn't there evidence of this in the past.
It would help if you posted a link to an article describing what you are talking about. I only vaguely remember reading something about this.
 
http://www.sciencebits.com/SkyResults.

The idea is that condensation of water vapor in the air requires some inducement to start. This can be a dust particle or something but a charged ion works very well too. It is argued that the induced solar magnetism varies with the flare / sunspot activity. This would cause the solar emitted charged particles which are heading for moderate latitudes on Earth to deviate to the poles, creating the auroras. With less condensation nuclei for the lower latitudes, cloud forming is inhibited, allowing for more sunlight to hit the Earth surface and consequently more global warming.

I don't believe the cloud formation by particles from space idea.

"Believe" is not a good practice for discovering how the Earth works. Consider it a set of N not linear equations with M variables and likely M>>N. Approaching that with the preconception that X <> A is unlikely to help solving it. Moreover there is evidence that climate and solar magnetic activity correlate.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The paper says that the evidence is strongest for a correlation between climate and cosmic rays on a millenial scale.But how inportant are cosmic rays in seeding cloud formation compared to dust particles from earth,for example?
 
Man activity in producing aerosols and dust particles due to industrial activity would very well exceed CR. Its deposited right into troposphere.

Cloud condensation nucleii (CCNs) and the whole process does not even seem to be that easy. More nucleii does not mean more clouds!
 
"More nucleii does not mean more clouds!"

Yes.Otherwise the dirtiest industrial regions would always be the cloudiest.
 
On August 10, 2025, there was a massive landslide on the eastern side of Tracy Arm fjord. Although some sources mention 1000 ft tsunami, that height represents the run-up on the sides of the fjord. Technically it was a seiche. Early View of Tracy Arm Landslide Features Tsunami-causing slide was largest in decade, earthquake center finds https://www.gi.alaska.edu/news/tsunami-causing-slide-was-largest-decade-earthquake-center-finds...
Hello, I’m currently writing a series of essays on Pangaea, continental drift, and Earth’s geological cycles. While working on my research, I’ve come across some inconsistencies in the existing theories — for example, why the main pressure seems to have been concentrated in the northern polar regions. So I’m curious: is there any data or evidence suggesting that an external cosmic body (an asteroid, comet, or another massive object) could have influenced Earth’s geology in the distant...
Back
Top