Cosmic Rays to Climate Change
Svensmark's Theory of Climate Control
‘‘…It’s gonna get really cold. And humans are just gonna turn into animals…’’ Eric Dollard, 2019
Overview
A Danish physicist has proposed a theory of climate control that has its origins’ deep within the cosmos.
As well as a convincing sounding mechanism, the theory is supported by real-world observations and experimental results.
Spoiler Alert: The theory suggests that cold times lie ahead! But this will be the subject of a later, follow-up piece, so please keep a look out for that one!
All of my readers will be somewhat familiar with the Greenhouse theory of climate control. See my previous articles What is the Greenhouse Effect, and A Fork in the Road for further discussion on this theory.
I described an alternative theory of climate control in Is There a Greenhouse Effect on Venus? that uses principles such as Ideal Gas Law to predict geological time-frame temperatures on Earth and elsewhere.
In this article we will take a look at another interesting theory of climate control…
This theory - known by some as the ‘Svensmark Theory’ after the Danish physicist Dr Henrik Svensmark - can be summarized in these three basic steps which I have explained in relatively simple terms below.
Solar Activity
Cosmic Rays
Cloud Formation
For more detail you can refer to the original Svensmark report upon which my descriptions are based.
(Or you can of course skip to the Conclusions at the end of this article if graphs are not your thing!)
1. Solar Activity
The Sun’s output - or ‘solar activity’ - can be measured by the number of sunspots that appear on its surface. Sunspots appear quite literally as dark spots when looked at through a suitable telescope1.
Observations show a clear 11-year cycle in the number of sunspots. These cycles are remarkably consistent, although the strength of the cycles are themselves modulated over a much longer timescale of centuries to millennia. For example, during the ‘Mini Ice Age’ of the 1600’s and 1700’s (The Maunder Minimum), the 11-year cycles were weak compared to the cycles of say the 20th Century.
2. Cosmic Rays
Cosmic rays are particles produced by stars outside of our own solar system2. These particles continuously bombard and penetrate the Earth’s atmosphere.
The Sun’s magnetic field, known as the Heliosphere, engulfs the Earth and acts like a shield against these incoming cosmic rays. A reduction in the Sun’s magnetic field, caused by reduced solar activity (which shows up in the sunspot cycles described above), allows more cosmic rays to reach the Earth’s atmosphere.
In other words, low sunspot numbers = high numbers of cosmic rays in our atmosphere, as can be seen in the figure below.
3. Cloud Formation
Cosmic rays contribute to a process in the atmosphere that form ‘condensation nuclei’. These are surfaces upon which water vapor present in the air can condense to form water droplets, which when combined make up clouds.3
Discovered as far back as 1996, there is a strong correlation between the amount of cosmic rays within the atmosphere and cloud cover.
Cloud cover is known to impact the Earth’s ‘energy budget’ significantly; clouds reflect the suns energy back into space preventing it from entering the climate system. If the Earth had no clouds, it would on average be much warmer, and vice versa.
The Missing Link?
So here we have a basic mechanism for climate control that can be predicted by looking at sunspots (a measure of solar activity). During periods of low solar activity the theory predicts a cooling of the Earth’s climate through the formation of additional cloud cover, and vice versa.
The relationship is further supported by looking at historical climate proxies over various timescales. Here I present one such example which is based on oxygen isotope levels in cave stalagmites found in Oman (a proxy for temperature), and Carbon-14 isotope levels as a proxy for solar activity. The correlation is impossible to ignore.
On the one hand it might sound obvious that the Earth’s climate follows the Sun’s activity.
However, it is a firmly held belief in current mainstream climate science that changes in the Earth’s climate are not sensitive to changes in observed solar activity. It is estimated that such solar changes would need to be an order of magnitude greater than those observed to be able to make a difference to the climate.
Svensmark’s theory of cosmic ray-induced cloud formation may, however, provide a missing amplification step, allowing our climatic changes to be explained by the solar variations we see.
Conclusion
Dr Svensmark believes that the impact of solar activity on climate is much larger than the official consensus (as put forward by IPCC, for example) suggests. IPCC have suggested that the effects on the climate from changes in the solar activity are negligible when compared with effects of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.
One obvious problem with the IPCC’s position, however, is that reconstructions of greenhouse gas levels on century to millennia timescales do not correlate well with temperature (see my Climate Control Knob article for more discussion on this topic).
Dr Svensmark’s proposed mechanism explains the solar-climate link and is supported by theory, experiment and observation.
Might one reason that current climate models consistently over-predict future temperatures be because they are missing this important cloud-formation mechanism of the climate system?
Coming soon...
I will return to the Svensmark theory of climatic control, and in particular, what it suggests for the immediate future of the Earth’s climate in a later article.
For now I will leave you with the words of the maverick electrical engineer, Eric P. Dollard, whose (somewhat dystopian!) words have stayed with me since hearing him discuss his own personal solar observations on a podcast in late 2019;
‘‘I pick it up on my radio equipment. There is something going on with the sun. Right now the sun has gone dead. There is no more solar cycle which is going to have profound implications… people will be begging for Global Warming. It’s gonna get really cold. And humans are just gonna turn into animals…’’ Eric Dollard on THC, Oct 2019
Please do keep an eye out for my follow-up piece where we will take a closer look at whether Mr Dollard’s concerns are well-founded!
As ever, I hope you found it interesting, and keep on asking questions!
-Tristan
Galileo Galilae started to measure sunspots back in the early 1600’s, with observations made ever since, resulting in a 400-year record of some form or another. Sunspots are regions of reduced temperature caused by magnetic phenomena reducing convection, and they can last anywhere from days to months.
Cosmic rays are particles that originate from outside of our solar system, high in energy from their acceleration caused by the shock-front of supernovae (stars that end their lives with violent explosions). Cosmic rays can be measured by ‘neutron monitors’ here on Earth.
The cosmic ray flux produces positive and negative ions in the Earth’s atmosphere (atmospheric ionization). These charged particles help form new small aerosols from trace gases in the atmosphere. Sulphuric acid, produced from natural photochemical processes, is one such example of a condensation nuclei-forming trace gas in a process helped and stabilized by cosmic rays.
Great article!
When his team's findings first came out (if I'm not mistaken, from the Niels Bohr institute, no less) they were rigorously attacked with anything but scientific arguments, mainly by end-of-career scientists, seemingly more occupied by protecting their career making, older findings about CO2-correllation and book sales than furthering the scientific development of mankind's understanding of these natural processes.
It was painful to watch, and even more so to see that they partially succeeded in keeping this basic understanding of nature suppressed.
Today, seeing how the CO2-theory helped further a global, financial industry in itself (as well as a ground work for renewing mining, energy and manufacturing sectors suffering greatly before) it is easy to understand the unwelcome level of disruption from this knowledge, that was all new back then.
My bachelor's degree is in Environmental Studies, and we never heard how cosmic rays impact climate back in the 80s, nor since then. But, as someone forced by frequent revelations that the mainstream 'got it wrong' about so many topics, I've come to be more open to contrarian viewpoints and even to "conspiracy theories."
Seeking a way to persuade friends to try new perspectives, I found an analogy that might give pause. Consider the assertion that "350 ppm of CO2 in the atmosphere is the top safe amount, and we're already at 420 ppm— catastrophe is heading our way!!" Atmospheric chemistry and physics are beyond most people. But when we convert that ratio to money, which all of us use daily, we find that instead of 420:1,000.000 we get 4 dimes and 2 pennies to a thousand dollars: 42:1000.
Really, can you imagine any way that 6 coins would be significant compared to $100, much less have any power over $1000?!