Svensmark’s Cosmic Theory Confirmed; Explains More Than Solar Role in Climate Change

by Dr. Tim Ball on August 26, 2011

in Astronomical,Politics,Solar,Theory

 “The great tragedy of Science: the slaying of a beautiful hypothesis by an ugly fact.” Thomas Huxley

Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) is the hypothesis being slain by an ugly fact. AGW has dominated world attention for thirty years because proponents used it to push a political agenda. Normally, scientists perform their natural role as skeptics, disproving a new hypothesis. Some scientists were complicit in thwarting the scientific method by participating in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the political vehicle set up to put all the focus on CO2. They, with their political cohorts, used the bureaucrats in each national weather agency through the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) to divert, downplay or even attack any person or fact that threatened their agenda. Most threatening were claims that they ignored the major climate driver, the Sun.

Despite their efforts facts continued to accumulate. It was so disconcerting they orchestrated attacks on the facts and individuals who found or promoted them. Those affiliated or part of the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) set up a web site for this purpose. Most of the CRU people and their associates were also members of the IPCC.

Previous ugly facts disproved the hypothesis for people who understand climate science, but proponents effectively sidelined them for the mainstream media and the public. They’re now confronted with final proof of Svensmark’s Cosmic Theory (CT). Few threats to the hypothesis were attacked more than Henrik Svensmark and his facts about the role of the Sun.

Obsessed with proving their hypothesis that CO2 was causing warming the IPCC ignored or diverted attention from the Sun. True they acknowledged that changes in irradiation explained half of temperature change up to 50 years ago, but now, through computer model manipulation, they claim CO2 explains some 90 percent. They ignore the ugly fact that in all records temperature increases before CO2. They’ve ignored the Milankovitch Effect, changes in Sun/Earth relationships, and more recently, the CT that explains the relationship between sunspots and global temperature.

Many blogs are discussing the latest research from the CERN cloud seeding experiment that confirms the CT claim that cosmic particles form condensation nuclei (CN) in the lower atmosphere. This creates low cloud that controls the amount of cloud cover and thereby the global temperature; like a screen in a greenhouse.

The IPCC consistently ignore the relationship between sunspot and global temperature though there’s extensive literature beginning with Galileo’s observations of sunspots in 1610. They said there was no explanatory mechanism, but that wasn’t true after 1991 when Friis-Christensen and Larsen published“Length of the Solar Cycle: An Indicator of Solar Activity Closely Associated with Climate” in Science. In 1996 Friis-Christensen, Director of the Danish National Space Institute, DTU, said,

“The evidence has piled up, first for the link between cosmic rays and low-level clouds and then, by experiment and observation, for the mechanism involving aerosols. All these consistent scientific results illustrate that the current climate models used to predict future climate are lacking important parts of the physics”

It appeared more fully in 1997 as the CT in embryonic form with Svensmark and Friis-Christensen’s “Variation of Cosmic Ray Flux and Global Cloud Coverage – a Missing Link in Solar-Climate relationships”. The 2001 IPCC Report mentioned it briefly, but it was omitted in the 2007 Report. The IPCC proponents claimed there was no evidence that cosmic radiation was creating as condensation nuclei in the atmosphere.

The problem was given to a supposedly neutral agency.

“The Director General of CERN stirred controversy last month, by saying that the CLOUD team’s report should be politically correct about climate change.”

Why? Now the results are published and the final piece in the puzzle is confirmed. Besides confirming the CT, they answer a longstanding problem. However, an important part of the discovery is missed, partly because of lack of focus on water vapor and precipitation, but mostly because the IPCC control of climate science blocked knowledge and advances for 30 years. A major problem in early meteorology and weather and climate research was there were more clouds than nuclei.

Evaporation occurs when water molecules use energy from the Sun to escape from a surface. This is a phase change, as water in liquid form becomes a gas, water vapor. The energy is not lost but becomes latent heat in the water vapor. If the air temperature is cooled below the Dew Point Temperature then a reverse phase change occurs called condensation and water vapor becomes liquid. The latent heat is released, which is why temperatures usually rise when precipitation occurs. The problem is this process requires a critical component, a solid surface. In the atmosphere this is provided by the CN. Water vapor condenses on to them to form water droplets, which are microscopic. They’re visible as clouds and remain suspended because they are so small – it’s estimated 1 million must combine to form a moderate sized raindrop.

The majority of CN were salt particles, kaolinite, the smallest clay particles and other particulates. Now the CT provides the missing nuclei. The amount of cosmic radiation is reduced as it passes through the Sun’s magnetic field and then the Earth’s magnetic field and then the upper atmosphere. In the atmosphere the cosmic rays become muons or heavy electrons that penetrate to sea level. They are the missing CN.

Proof that cosmic rays provide CN to form clouds in the lower atmosphere is an ugly fact that even the professional scientific spin-doctors cannot avoid. These clouds vary with the intensity of cosmic rays reaching the atmosphere and act like a shade in the global greenhouse to control temperature. We now have proof of the mechanism or cause and effect for what was previously only a correlation. Sunspots are not the cause but a manifestation of changes in the Sun’s magnetic field that in turn modulates the intensity of cosmic rays reaching the Earth. So another ugly fact creates a large cloud that destroys the politically driven AGW hypothesis.