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
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
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...
?
Leave a comment: