Sun causes climate change

[BlasterBates]

Yet another paper on cosmic rays and the sun

New study links cosmic rays to aerosols/cloud formation via solar magnetic activity modulation | Watts Up With That?

Another project at CERN is also showing positive results, project leader says their experiments were successful. Video clip somewhere.

Of course this doesn't contradict AGW. So no point in rampaging about it if you're that way inclined.

[hyperD]

Uh oh, you've done it now, I hear a distant rumbling from East Anglia - beware the appearance of the pjclark behemoth to immolate you using his Scroll of Many Links and stun you with his Spell of Condescendence.

May the Great Stationary Windmill grant us the strength to power the oxen that pull our Volvos to work each day....

[AtW]

Look, nobody on here really give a tulip about AGW, ok?

[EternalOptimist]

Look, nobody on here really give a tulip about AGW, ok?

I am not really interested in politics
economics
religion
greener shoes
football
sport in general


but I am interested in CAGW.

The point about BB post is surely that at last, AT LAST, a climate scientists is doing an experiment
then asking folks to reproduce the results or falsify the results.
This is not a model - its an experiment.
Thats a blooming breakthrough that is

[BlasterBates]

That GCRs can form aerosols is pretty uncontroversial. From there to cloud nuclei and then to clouds has not yet been observed, but is certainly plausible. But hang on, I thought anyone doing research that might contradict AGW was ruthlessly suppressed and denied access to the literature and research grant honeypot ?

There's a similar multi-million-euro project going on at CERN (CLOUD - Cosmics Leaving Outdoor Droplets geddit?)

Can anyone explain why their graph showing correlation is truncated in 1985?

Here's one that isn't.



Reconstructed cosmic radiation (solid line before 1952) and directly observed cosmic radiation (solid line after 1952) compared to global temperature (dotted line).

How do you calculate correlation?

Do you "eyeball" two graphs and declare them uncorrelated if a small section doesn't "look right"?

Here's a clue.

Correlation and dependence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[pjclarke]

Well I shall not be taking any lessons from Mr Svensmark

The last decade has seen a revival of various hypotheses claiming a strong correlation between solar activity and a number of terrestrial climate parameters.Links have been made between cosmic rays and cloud cover, first total cloud cover and then only low clouds, and between solar cycle lengths and northern hemisphere land temperatures.

Analysis of a number of published graphs that have played a major role in these debates and that have been claimed to support solar hypotheses [Laut, 2003; Damon and Peristykh, 1999, 2004] shows that the apparent strong correlations displayed on these graphs have been obtained by incorrect handling of the physical data. [...] close analysis of the central graphs in all of these articles reveals questionable handling of the underlying physical data. In the 1991 article, the impressive agreement of the solar curve with terrestrial temperatures during the global warming of the recent decennia had been a major factor in the article’s strong impact. But this agreement was actually an artifact: it had simply been obtained by adding, to a heavily smoothed (“filtered”) curve, four additional points covering the period of global warming,which were only partially filtered or not filtered at all. [...] Today, in the year 2004,more data have become available, and the four points can be plotted more correctly . Now the sensational agreement with the recent global warming,which drew worldwide attention,has totally disappeared. Nevertheless, the authors and other researchers keep presenting the old misleading graph

Pattern of Strange Errors Plagues Solar Activity and Terrestrial Climate Data

Svensmark truncated his graph because the correlation mysteriously stopped working 25 years ago. Cosmic ray flux has been measured directly since 1950-ish, in which period it has tracked the 11-year solar cycle but exhibited no long term trend, while every decade has been warmer than the last...