Posted on 10/11/2021 4:46:57 AM PDT by one guy in new jersey
A new study published in Nature’s Scientific Reports by researchers at the Danish National Space Institute at the Technical University of Denmark (DTU) and The Hebrew University of Jerusalem suggests that the Sun’s activity in screening cosmic rays affects clouds and, ultimately, the Earth's energy budget with concomitant climatic effects. Science editor David Whitehouse interviews Professor Henrik Svensmark, one of the study's authors.
(Excerpt) Read more at m.youtube.com ...
Thanks for the link to the article.
Noticed immediately that No One has cited this research.
Political suicide for anyone who does I would imagine.
YES! Finally! Svensmark and Calder’s titular book “The Chilling Stars” went over every last bit of science to back up his claim, and now he has continued evidence proving it.
This will not bring about any change, because Svensmark isn’t towing the climate psychosis line; but now we have some REAL science to back it up.
Can anyone link me to the published paper? I have performed a number of searches and haven’t found the underlying study?
That’s not what this is about at all.
The thing with the cosmic rays isn’t the added heat, it’s that it causes an ionization of a molecule in the air that serves as a nucleation point for a water droplet - which collectively forms clouds. The more of those types of clouds, the higher the albedo of the planet, Thus, the higher the cosmic ray rate making it through the magnetosphere, the *cooler* it makes the earth’s atmosphere.
mjp says he found the journal article, giving its title as “Atmospheric Ionization and Cloud Radiative Forcing”
The cosmic ray aspect has been posited for a while, but the studies not put together and completed until a few years ago.
Dr. David Dilley's observations and conclusions
Professor Valentina Zharkova Breaks Her Silence and CONFIRMS “Super” Grand Solar Minimum
A Climate Modeller( Dr. Mototaka Nakamura) Spills the Beans - Tony Thomas don't be afraid of the Japanese it's mostly in English
Dr. Mototaka Nakamura's Semi-Free Kindle Book
Cosmic rays linked to increased mortality Cosmic Rays, Neutrons And The Mutation Rate In Evolution
7
bookmarked
Correct. True Believers are what they are. Reason is futile. I try to inject humor, it’s the only thing they have trouble defending against. Scientific evidence, logic, they just bat those things away like annoying little flies.
I have to wait until I have twelve minutes to just sit and listen. It is not the same experience as reading.
“The cosmic ray aspect has been posited for a while, but the studies not put together and completed until a few years ago.”
Life is tough out there in the heliosphere...
The publication date appears to be today. If that’s true, there hasn’t been time yet for the paper to be cited elsewhere.
But your point remains a good one. Nobody will want to interrupt the grant money gravy train by citing this paper, whether favorably or critically.
The paper is available for free .PDF download. I downloaded it. It’s only 13 pages and begins as follows:
Atmospheric ionization and cloud
radiative forcing
Henrik Svensmark1*, Jacob Svensmark2,4, Martin Bødker Enghof1,4 & Nir J. Shaviv3,4
Atmospheric ionization produced by cosmic rays has been suspected to infuence aerosols and clouds, but its actual importance has been questioned. If changes in atmospheric ionization have a substantial impact on clouds, one would expect to observe signifcant responses in Earth’s energy budget. Here it is shown that the average of the fve strongest week-long decreases in atmospheric ionization coincides with changes in the average net radiative balance of 1.7 W/m2 (median value: 1.2 W/m2) using CERES satellite observations. Simultaneous satellite observations of clouds show
that these variations are mainly caused by changes in the short-wave radiation of low liquid clouds along with small changes in the long-wave radiation, and are almost exclusively located over the pristine areas of the oceans. These observed radiation and cloud changes are consistent with a link in which atmospheric ionization modulates aerosol’s formation and growth, which survive to cloud
condensation nuclei and ultimately affect cloud formation and thereby temporarily the radiative balance of Earth.
A fundamental question during the last two decades has been whether changes in atmospheric ionization can perturb aerosols and thereby cloud properties. Both aerosols and clouds are an essential part of the terrestrial atmosphere, infuencing weather and climate1–3. Ionization in the atmosphere is mainly caused by cosmic ray particles, which have their origin outside our solar system. Solar activity modulates the flux of cosmic ray particles on time scales from days to millennia, whereas on geological time scales it is the position of the solar system in our Galaxy, which is important for ionization4,5. A link involving ionization, aerosols, and clouds would be an exciting interconnection between Earth and the Galaxy. Indeed, laboratory experiments demonstrated that ions assist the nucleation of new (∼ 1–2 nm) aerosol particles6,7, and evidence from airborne observations also document that ion nucleation is an important source of aerosols in the free troposphere8. However, these results do not by themselves assure that aerosols survive to cloud condensation nuclei (CCN) such that variations in ionization can change CCN concentrations and subsequently clouds. In fact, studies testing the role of ion-nucleation using global numerical aerosol models indicate that the response of CCN to changes in ionization is too small to be of any signifcance9–14. The reason being that any changes in ion-nucleated aerosol number density get attenuated by absorption on existing aerosols before the particles can grow to CCN. However, there is evidence contrasting the numerical results. Recent theoretical and experimental results detail how ions can accelerate the growth of small aerosols by increasing the mass-fux from the gas phase to aerosols15,16, and this ion-condensation mechanism is not included in the numerical modeling. A mechanism accelerating aerosol growth in the real atmosphere would lead to a higher survival rate of aerosols growing to CCN sizes.
Observational support for the link connecting atmospheric ionization with cloud changes has been pursued
using naturally occurring week-long suppression of atmospheric ionization of the order 10–20%. Such events are called Forbush Decreases (FDs)17 and are caused by a magnetized plasma cloud from the Sun hitting Earth, thereby shielding part of the cosmic ray flux. Initially, FD studies gave conficting results18–23 (see section 7.4 in23) but by sorting the FDs according to their strength a significant response was found in both aerosols and clouds in the case of the strong FDs23.
I was taught the sun’s role in our climate in a one room school at about grade 5.
In much simpler words.
Greta! Greta! Help!
ping
I'm talking about GEOLOGIC effects.
The bad news, the really bad news, is we are both correct.
More fluid magma means more vulcanism, more vulcanism means more ash, more CO2, more sulfuric acid, more other crap in the atmosphere.
Add that to the clouds you are concerned about and...
The followup is to remind them that throughout all history the cold times, the ice ages and years without summer are when extinctions peaked, do they hate animals as well?
Then the kill shot: Every time the world has been warm, life flourished! Are they anti-life?
My work here is done.
If I can’t sleep, there’s no reason you should be able to sleep...
> LoL! Very funny. Biden reference I take it?
Nope, can’t be a Biden reference. Biden is where the sun don’t shine. :-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
