If there aren’t any sun spots then the solar wind is decreased,
I don’t think you get the article.
I'm not sure how to say this to you any more than I've already said. I think I've made it clear that sunspots are related to the solar wind. They increase and decrease according to these sunspots, but the solar wind doesn't go away, in any case. It may be reduced as a result of the absence of sunspots.
What I'm saying is that the variance in the temperature, globally, really has to do with the cosmic rays and cloud formation.
And again, I believe I "get the article" very well.
I think the part you don't "get" -- however, is summed up in the following from that aricle...
Penn himself wonders about these points. "Our technique is relatively new and the data stretches back in time only 17 years. We could be observing a temporary downturn that will reverse itself."
That's why I say that all these kinds of things in nature go in cycles. Just because we're observing something going one way now, doesn't mean that the cycle doesn't go back the other way.
So, I don't see a problem with the information and data as presented in that article. It's just an interesting piece of information and I'm sure they will do more studies on it over the coming years.
Heck! Since we've talked about this article is so many posts now, I might as well include it here... see the next post...
I think you are getting 98% of this.
The last 2% is that the mag flux is acting as a catalyst for sun spots.
It is like you are starving a fire of it’s oxygen.
We may be seeing an extended absence of sun spots, we can see that they are trying to form, but they can’t.
The mag flux is too weak.
Since we don’t have any long term measurements of mag flux like the sun spot records, there is even a chance that we may be sending the end of sun spots.
Flash forward 20 years, a father talks to his son and says when I was little we still had sun spots. In other words, they may be history.