Svensmark’s cosmic ray theory of clouds and global warming looks to be confirmed

The connections between the Sun, Cosmic Rays and the cold climate associated with grand minimums is becoming much clearer.

Watts Up With That?

Note: Between flaccid climate sensitivity, ENSO driving “the pause”, and now this, it looks like the upcoming IPCC AR5 report will be obsolete the day it is released.

From a Technical University of Denmark press release comes what looks to be a significant confirmation of Svensmark’s theory of temperature modulation on Earth by cosmic ray interactions. The process is that when there are more cosmic rays, they help create more microscopic cloud nuclei, which in turn form more clouds, which reflect more solar radiation back into space, making Earth cooler than what it normally might be. Conversely, less cosmic rays mean less cloud cover and a warmer planet as indicated here.  The sun’s magnetic field is said to deflect cosmic rays when its solar magnetic dynamo is more active, and right around the last solar max, we were at an 8000 year high, suggesting more deflected cosmic rays…

View original post 703 more words

10 thoughts on “Svensmark’s cosmic ray theory of clouds and global warming looks to be confirmed

    • G Goodknight September 6, 2013 / 3:12 pm

      It was a Svensmark paper in 2007 that cemented my move from lukewarmer to skeptic to out and out scoffer. Not because all of the i’s were dotted and t’s crossed, but because it was clear the warmists were avoiding issue like the plague, and, given the *proof* of Shaviv & Veizer 2003 that galactic cosmic ray flux intensity drives the earth’s climate over geological time, I could see no way GCR flux could be the driver of our climate averaged over millions of years without having a much shorter term influence.

      See the Svensmark “Cosmoclimatology” paper of 2007 and pay attention to his figure 8.

  1. Walnut September 6, 2013 / 6:32 am

    Someone needed to do a better job of explaining the cosmic ray/cloud seeding/solar wind mechanism, it sounded like science fiction when I tried to explain it to my friends, and certainly wouldn’t sway any hard core carbon junkies. I love to see this.

    • G Goodknight September 6, 2013 / 4:33 pm

      That’s why the warmistas have been so successful at avoiding the issue, but it will always sound like science fiction to many. You have to believe that supernovas from starts elsewhere in our galaxy have been bombarding our atmosphere with charged particles travelling near the speed of light and affecting our climate by helping to produce clouds, and that when the Sun’s heliosphere (magnetic field and solar wind) is strong, we are better shielded and there are fewer GCR helping to produce clouds and it’s warmer, and when the heliosphere is weak there are more GCR, more clouds and it’s cooler.

      That’s a lot of things one cannot see that one must accept as real, especially if fractions and “your friend, the Amoeba” were the limit of one’s scientific schooling.

    • Sean September 7, 2013 / 4:23 pm

      Let me try an explanation that is as simple as night and day, which in reality, is where greenhouse gas theory and galactic cosmic ray theory operate. When the sun shines during the day, it heats up the earth. At night (and during the day to a lessor extent) the warmth picked up by solar radiation can be diffused to the ground, the water or out into space. Since the earth is a cold body relative to the sun, the radiation out into space is long wavelength and can be absorbed by molecules in the atmosphere like CO2 and water.vapor. If the concentration of C02 and water increase, then, then more of the radiation from the surface gets picked up by the atmosphere and it warms. The GCR theory to counter warming acts during the day. According to GCR theory, when the earth is bombarded by more GCR’s, clouds form more easily and more clouds reflect a greater portion of the incoming short wave solar radiation back into space. It is further complicated by the fact that clouds can also act as a blanket and hold in heat. The net effect is that if you get more low level clouds, you tip the balance towards cooling. (We are only talking 0.1 to 0.2% change in the energy balance between warming and cooling.). I believe there may be people can measure overall cloud cover during solar cycles and they’ve found more clouds at solar minimum. We are now in a very weak solar cycle but its very hard to say if we are seeing solar cosmic ray effects yet or just the ocean cycles, Around 2025 things will get really interesting. You’ll still have a cold PDO, the AMO will have gone from its warm phase to its cold phase and the sun will likely be in a deeper minimum than now. It all argues for cooling and CO2 will be up over 425 PPM. I guess we will find out soon enough if AGW or something natural.

    • R. de Haan December 22, 2013 / 10:27 am

      The theory is rather simple.

      It states that when the solar magnetic field is low, intergalactic particles penetrate our atmosphere at lower altitudes creating additional condensation cores, hence more clouds.

      More clouds = cooling because the clouds reflect incoming sun light.

      Svensmark’s theory has been proven in a cloud chamber experiment performed by CERN some time ago.

      However, if you really want a quick explanation what drive’s earth’s temperatures, watch this graph from Vukcevic:

      And read this article:
      Decades old mystery in earth’s armosphere solved:  RELATED:

  2. Doh! September 16, 2013 / 1:37 pm

    Do you ever hear about a device know as “Wilson’s chamber”? Originaly designed for studying… cloud formation. It was used in the early day of atomic physic to “see” the path of ionising radiation. Yes you are rigth the ionising particule form droplet of water on their path. You know ionising particule like cosmic ray. Of cours cosmic ray can create cloud! Water is a dipolar molecule after all! This is know for nearly 100 years!!! Apparently, GW wanabee pseudo-scientists appear to run some 100 years behind real science.

  3. Carl G. Looney December 15, 2013 / 11:22 am

    Let’s get the horse before the cart, not behind it. When the solar radiation is weaker, it permits more cosmic particles from space to hit the Earth. Stronger solar radiation deflects much of the particle bombardment from space.
    In turn, this causes more clouding at all levels of the atmosphere. This may return some of the infrared radiation toward Earth, but the door to space is much larger than the Earth’s surface, so there is a net loss of heat to space. This equal lower temperatures on Earth.
    Ciao, have a good one. — Carl..

  4. Dr. Steve Herr January 8, 2014 / 9:17 pm

    . The sunspot cycles are clearly an important aspect of global temperatures on the earth. When there is high solar activity the sun emits more radiation i.e. energy, than when there’s no solar activity or sunspots. In addition, sunspots are a manifestation of disturbances in the sun’s magnetic field at the surface of sun, this causes the sun’s magnetic field to extend out into the solar system. This enhanced magnetic field wraps around the earth’s magnetic field protecting the earth from cosmic radiation. It has been shown that cosmic radiation enhances cloud formation in the upper atmosphere of the earth. Shielding the earth from cosmic radiation during increased solar cycles reduces cloud formation in the upper atmosphere thereby reducing reflection of the solar radiation from clouds. Hence during high sunspot cycles there’s more radiation incident on the upper atmosphere and much less reflection thereby increasing the amount of radiation entering the earth’s atmosphere. This causes a double whammy, more radiation, less reflection, means more energy absorbed by the earth’s atmosphere and increased global temperature. When there are no sunspots, there is less radiation, and more clouds in the upper atmosphere as the suns magnetic field is no longer protecting the earth from cosmic radiation thus causing more radiation (energy) to be reflected away from the earth resulting in lower temperatures. Therefore we must concern ourselves with more than just the amount of solar output and factor in the reflectivity of the earth’s atmosphere.
    The combination of the sun’s variable output energy and the variable reflectivity of the earth’s atmosphere must be considered simultaneously when determining the energy absorbed. When the sun’s output is greatest, the reflectivity is least, greatly enhancing the amount of energy absorbed. When the suns output is the least, the reflectivity is the greatest, greatly reducing the amount of energy absorbed.

    • Russ Steele January 8, 2014 / 11:21 pm

      Thanks for sharing this information.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s