Timeforchange102? Are you the same person as timeforachange101, with a slight course discription change, or are you someone else?
To me, the importance of the NASA findings is that it proves the climate models, that have been used to predict changes to the global climate over time are flawed, possibly seriously flawed.
To me, the importance of the CLOUD experiments is to prove that there are still processes taking place in the atmosphere that we are unaware of, and I'm sure more will be found in the future.
Taken individually or together, neather of these findings prove or disprove anthropogenic global warming. But generally they do provide a basis for a counter argument. At least enough to warrant being investigated further.
No my beef is that these findings are ignored and in some cases ridiculed, because they do not prove the "Settled Science" of Anthropogenic Global Warming. And the scientists, reporting these results are muzzled.
CERN Director General Rolf-Dieter Heuer, QUOTE: “I have asked the colleagues to present the results clearly, but not to interpret them,” because, “That would go immediately into the highly political arena of the climate change debate. One has to make clear that cosmic radiation is only one of many parameters.”
Actually, I didn't think there were any reputable scientists that didn't believe in anthropogenic global warming.