The Cloud Mystery - Grade: 95 PDF

Preview

Summary

Essay on The Cloud Mystery ...

Description

Singer 1 Andrew Singer Catherine Pappas-Maenz Earthquakes and Volcanoes 13th of May 2019 Critical Analysis – The Cloud Mystery Documentary In the early months of 2008, a Danish director named Lars Oxfeldt Mortensen released a documentary called “The Cloud Mystery” which entails the published theory of Danish scientist Henrik Svensmark. This theory describes how the sun and its activities like cosmic rays affects the amount of clouds we have on earth, which inevitably changes the earth’s climate. For the purpose of the documentary and of his experiment, Svensmark worked closely with an IsraeliAmerican physics professor named Nir Shaviv. Together these two men travelled the world moving forward with their research on clouds and what about clouds effects climate change. They presented their findings to many scientists and to their surprise, they received a tremendous amount of backlash. The documentary explores both these men and their conquest to find another explanation for climate change. Science is not a perfect study. There is always speculation as to what is real and what is fake. If the earth being flat is still an argued for subject to this day, it is no doubt that the change of the earth’s climate will be as well. Svensmark and Shaviv are two men who question what is being fed to us by the media, the UN, and most of the scientific community. However, it is unfair to dismiss their arguments without proving them absolutely wrong. A task which is still yet to be done. The basis of the documentary’s argument is that cosmic rays and solar activity affect cloud cover, which in turn changes the temperature of the planet. Evidence was needed in order to validify their theory, so they conducted a few experiments in order to be able to further prove their hypothesis. One experiment was called the SKY Experiment. Svensmark conducted this at the Danish National Space Institute in order to determine whether or not cosmic rays have an

Singer 2 effect on cloud formation in the lower part of the earth’s atmosphere. He used electrons to test if a cosmic ray would form molecular clusters which would then create clouds. His hypothesis was proven through this experiment which further advanced his theory. One thing about this theory which is interesting is that it is not being presented by any random person. This is not being brought up by some crazy rapper or celebrity. The arguments put forward are by award winning scientists who have devoted their lives to their causes. I found it wrong of Sir John mason who was the former director general of the UK to tell Svensmark that he lacked “basic elementary knowledge” because he did not. Svensmark presented his claims in calm and intellectual manners. He was not radical in his presentation and he should be treated with the same respect as any other scientist. Just because his opinion is contrary to theirs does not mean he is not a scientist or a part of the scientific community. Based upon what I have seen in the documentary I will not say that I throw 100% of my beliefs towards Svensmark. However, after viewing and listening and researching this man, I do think that his theory should be put to the test. I myself love a conspiracy theory. I throw them around at parties and dinner tables to see the reaction that some people have. I find that as soon as someone has an opinion that contradicts popular belief, everybody just dismisses them as “stupid” or “uneducated”. Unfortunately, what a lot of people fail to realize is that sometimes, opinions are not based upon pseudoarcheology or what they saw on Facebook last night. Some people like Henrik Svensmark actually carry out their arguments with factual evidence. This documentary presents an argument based off of logic and facts which are proven by extensive experimentation. The documentary is organized, its justified, and it is objective according to each side of the argument being heard.

Singer 3 I believe that the information which is presented in the documentary should be further investigated on a global scale. There should be government funding and teams of researchers who are devoted to proving Svensmark right or wrong. It is like he said in the film, “Many time during talks, people have got very excited and very strongly have tried to tell me that what I was doing was a complete waste of time, but not a single one has come up with anything from a scientific point of view that made me think that I was wrong.” What Svensmark is saying is that how can he be wrong if nobody can prove it? I am not a believer in throwing out opinions because they go against mine and neither should the scientific community. Without contradicting opinions, we would not understand the rules of physics, we would not know that the earth is round, we would not question what the media is feeding to us. Svensmark is just as entitled to his opinion as anybody else and the scientific community should support and allocate funds towards his efforts. The aspect I enjoyed most of the documentary is Henrik Svensmark himself. His resilience and stubbornness are present throughout the entirety of the screening. I learned a lot from this documentary. I do not think I see eye to eye with Svensmark just yet, but I will continue to question and research what is being portrayed to me by the government and the media. I think that Svensmark presents a fantastic argument which I believe could be proven to be true with the right team behind the cause. I would recommend this documentary to anyone who is open to exploring a scientific opinion which may counter their own. In summation, this documentary is one that I will always remember whenever someone tells me my opinion is invalid. I believe Henrik Svensmark is an inspiration and that he should be renowned instead of rejected. His beliefs and values should be respected by the scientific

Singer 4 community instead of thrown away. I believe we can all be inspired by Svensmark and his work in his professional field....