It’s really rather sad that you can read about Svensmark’s climate research in an Iranian news outlet (FARS) but you won’t see any mention of it in American press, such as in the NYT. A search for Svensmark (and also cosmic rays) yields nothing. Maybe Andy Revkin just hasn’t gotten around to it yet, but if I were in his shoes, I wouldn’t enjoy being scooped by Iran. WUWT covered this story, complete with comments direct from Dr. Svensmark, nearly one month ago. See here.
Here’s the story from FARS:
===
TEHRAN (FNA)- New research by the National Space Institute in the Technical University of Denmark (DTU) validated 13 years of discoveries that point to a key role for cosmic rays in climate change.

Billions of tons of water droplets vanish from the atmosphere in events that reveal in detail how the Sun and the stars control our everyday clouds.
DTU Researchers have traced the consequences of eruptions on the Sun that screen the Earth from some of the cosmic rays – the energetic particles raining down on our planet from exploded stars.
“The Sun makes fantastic natural experiments that allow us to test our ideas about its effects on the climate,” lead author of a report newly published in Geophysical Research Letters Prof. Henrik Svensmark said.
When solar explosions interfere with the cosmic rays there is a temporary shortage of small aerosols, chemical specks in the air that normally grow until water vapor can condense on them, so seeding the liquid water droplets of low-level clouds.
Because of the shortage, clouds over the ocean can lose as much as 7 per cent of their liquid water within seven or eight days of the cosmic-ray minimum.
“A link between the Sun, cosmic rays, aerosols, and liquid-water clouds appears to exist on a global scale,” the report concludes.
This research, to which Torsten Bondo and Jacob Svensmark contributed, validates 13 years of discoveries that point to a key role for cosmic rays in climate change.
In particular, it connects observable variations in the world’s cloudiness to laboratory experiments in Copenhagen showing how cosmic rays help to make the all-important aerosols.
Other investigators have reported difficulty in finding significant effects of the solar eruptions on clouds, and Henrik Svensmark understands their problem.
“It’s like trying to see tigers hidden in the jungle, because clouds change a lot from day to day whatever the cosmic rays are doing,” he says.
The first task for a successful hunt was to work out when “tigers” were most likely to show themselves, by identifying the most promising instances of sudden drops in the count of cosmic rays, called Forbush decreases.
Previous research in Copenhagen predicted that the effects should be most notice-able in the lowest 3000 meters of the atmosphere. The team identified 26 Forbush decreases since 1987 that caused the biggest reductions in cosmic rays at low altitudes, and set about looking for the consequences.
The first global impact of the shortage of cosmic rays is a subtle change in the color of sunlight, as seen by ground stations of the aerosol robotic network AERONET.
By analyzing its records during and after the reductions in cosmic rays, the DTU team found that violet light from the Sun looked brighter than usual. A shortage of small aerosols, which normally scatter violet light as it passes through the air, was the most likely reason. The color change was greatest about five days after the minimum counts of cosmic rays.
Henrik Svensmark and his team were not surprised by it, because the immediate action of cosmic rays, seen in laboratory experiments, creates micro-clusters of sulphuric acid and water molecules that are too small to affect the AERONET observations.
Only when they have spent a few days growing in size should they begin to show up, or else be noticeable by their absence. The evidence from the aftermath of the Forbush decreases, as scrutinized by the Danish team, gives aerosol experts valuable information about the formation and fate of small aerosols in the Earth’s atmosphere.
Although capable of affecting sunlight after five days, the growing aerosols would not yet be large enough to collect water droplets. The full impact on clouds only becomes evident two or three days later.
It takes the form of a loss of low-altitude clouds, because of the earlier loss of small aerosols that would normally have grown into “cloud condensation nuclei” capable of seeding the clouds.
“Then it’s like noticing bare patches in a field, where a farmer forgot to sow the seeds,” Svensmark explains. “Three independent sets of satellite observations all tell a similar story of clouds disappearing, about a week after the minimum of cosmic rays.”
Averaging satellite data on the liquid-water content of clouds over the oceans, for the five strongest Forbush decreases from 2001 to 2005, the DTU team found a 7 per cent decrease, as mentioned earlier.
That translates into 3 billion tons of liquid water vanishing from the sky. The water remains the-re in vapor form, but unlike cloud droplets it does not get in the way of sunlight trying to warm the ocean. After the same five Forbush decreases, satellites measuring the extent of liquid-water clouds revealed an average reduction of 4 per cent. Other satellites showed a similar 5 per cent reduction in clouds below 3200 meters over the ocean.
“The effect of the solar explosions on the Earth’s cloudiness is huge,” Henrik Svensmark comments.
“A loss of clouds of 4 or 5 per cent may not sound very much, but it briefly increases the sunlight reaching the oceans by about 2 watt per square meter, and that’s equivalent to all the global warming during the 20th Century.”
The Forbush decreases are too short-lived to have a lasting effect on the climate, but they dramatize the mechanism that works more patiently during the 11-year solar cycle.
When the Sun becomes more active, the decline in low-altitude cosmic radiation is greater than that seen in most Forbush events and the loss of low cloud cover persists for long enough to warm the world.
That explains, according to the DTU team, the alternations of warming and cooling seen in the lower atmosphere and in the oceans during solar cycles.
The director of the Danish National Space Institute, DTU, Eigil Friis-Christensen, was co-author with Svensmark of an early report on the effect of cosmic rays on cloud cover, back in 1996.
Commenting on the latest paper he 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”.


gt (09:20:36) :
It’s a bit unfair to expect a small section of NYT (Dot Earth) to carry all climate-related news, and compare it to a national news agency…
Right, especially when the NYT itself is no longer a truely “national news agency”.
Re: Climate, WUWT just does it better, apparently even without those “layers and layers” of peer-reviewing “Editors” which the “MSM” [antiquated] touts.
And check out what ABC radio thinks is even “news”, every hour on the hour. I hear all kinds of wild stuff there, like once some bees got loose and into a guy’s house, then they turned into “wasps”. Etc..
Comrades, it’s just not “fair”.
NYT — All the news that fits.
Loveland Ski Resort (less than an hour from Denver) opened today. Earliest opening date in 40 years, according to a local news report.
Yes, yes. Weather, not climate. Still, several excellent skiing years in Colorado recently. While the weather may remain great for skiing, the industry may fall victim to the economy, however. As unemployment climbs, and household income drops, skiing may become a luxury affordable to too small a group to sustain an industry of the current size.
Wow. look at all the snow coming down in the north west.
http://www.weather.com/multimedia/videoplayer.html?clip=364&collection=national&from=hp_news
Yikes, hard to follow. To summarize:
As sunspot activity declines (and it’s real low this summer),
shielding declines,
cosmic rays reaching the lower atmosphere increase,
aerosols increase,
clouds increase,
reflection increases,
solar heating of the Earth declines.
Unmentioned is whether cosmic rays are responsible for all cloud formation, or just an extra four or five percent.
Ron de Haan (10:11:03) :
At least the Iranians have not stooped to using science to inflict harm on thier crazy regime.
In other words, the warmist agenda seeks to impose a lower entropy on Western society and plans to profit by shorting it.
This is just a more advanced form of corporate gobbling, done at a half-hemispherical scale, under guise of Planetary Salvation modeling.
“We’re delighted to have earned the support of NOAA for our climate change initiatives,” said Cynthia Vernon” I bet you are darling. See where your tax dollars go lads. —http://www.ksbw.com/news/21239836/detail.html
Now we have the real reasons for the UN sanctions against Iran…
I’m confused-because this is coming from Iranian press (home of the Holocaust is a fabrication theory and we don’t want no stinkin’ A bomb) the publication there lends more credence to the theory? Or we should be more like Iran? If so, how’s their healthcare? Anyone know?
t-bird (11:47:36) :
“Unmentioned is whether cosmic rays are responsible for all cloud formation, or just an extra four or five percent.”
Bingo!
What are the percentages of all major and minor influences on the climate?
As of today Intellicast’s global maps is showing general cooling in the NH and not much in the way of warming in the SH for the 4 days after today, there’s also indication that for those next 4 days there will still be milder air being driven into the Arctic for heat dumping as seen by its forecast for Barrow Alaska.
It seems like the Oceans aren’t warming in response to the current ENSO event like seen in 1998 and if this El Nino strengthens a little than one wonder if that’s just going to mean even less heat in the oceans than if it right away swapped back to La Nina considering previous discussion here, heat content according to NOAA’s TAO site currently shows no noticable increase nor much of a decrease.
P Gosselin (09:16:45) :
“Somehow we have to combine the American tradition of freedom and entrpreneurship together with Iranain openness on science, and we’ll be fine!”
All we are going to share with Iran after they screwed up the Geneva Meeting last week is this:
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jwIaLotSkaw29J0t9eD1EF7Ct8VQ
rbateman (12:20:54) :
Ron de Haan (10:11:03) :
“At least the Iranians have not stooped to using science to inflict harm on thier crazy regime.
In other words, the warmist agenda seeks to impose a lower entropy on Western society and plans to profit by shorting it.
This is just a more advanced form of corporate gobbling, done at a half-hemispherical scale, under guise of Planetary Salvation modeling.”
rbateman,
It’s a Marxist coup and it ends up with the suppression of the people.
We have to stop it at any price.
Ron de Haan (10:04:45) :
“http://www.accuweather.com/news-story.asp?partner=rss&article=0
REPLY: Ron, please do readers the courtesy of describing links – Anthony”
WILCO
How much does a 2 Watt forcing of solar radation change the temperature?
Snow removal.
Shovel ready jobs we have been waiting for. So sad the wind died down and the widmills stopped. I guess electric heat is still rare.
The middle east doesn’t have a problem with posting climate news. They don’t have oil drilling restrictions.
P Gosselin (09:13:43)
Al Gore is coming to Chicago 🙂
Dan (13:07:35) :
Nothing to be confused about, Dan, this is simply what Eisnehower warned us about.
The corruption of science for political purpose is a recipe for disaster.
Most nations at one time understood and prevented this. You either keep up with the Jones on advancing science by keeping agenda out of it, or you make science into a feeding trough dependent on political whim and bring advance to a screeching halt.
For all of Iran’s failings, this isn’t one of them (agenda-based science steering)
Carlo (14:14:30) :
Al Gore better think that one over. The news yesterday from Chicago of a mob fighting over 3500 Rent assistance grants say what’s on folks minds: They need real jobs, not green fantasia promises. Winter is set to hit Chicago, and the desperation to stay warm is going to drive the thought process.
Meanwhile, back at Global Climate Central, the issuing of catastrophic warming continues.
At some point, one no longer needs a climate forecast to see where things are going.
“Because of the shortage, clouds over the ocean can lose as much as 7 per cent of their liquid water within seven or eight days of the cosmic-ray minimum.”
News to me. The middle east lacks in rain and this is critical.
On climate progress there is a new “surge” of articles. Most are political and all are prophetic.
This article is actual cosmic radiation. The Joe Romm stuff is power point slides of 2099 and threats of temps.
It’s alarming that some of the posters here believe Iran needs to be “liberated”.
You would think this liberation lie would be at least as transparent as the AGW hoax.
One American columnist wrote it up. (Shameless self promotion follows)
http://www.dailynebraskan.com/opinion/harbison-convincing-correlation-between-sunspots-climate-should-be-examined-1.1908920
“When solar explosions interfere with the cosmic rays there is a temporary shortage of small aerosols, chemical specks in the air that normally grow until water vapor can condense on them, so seeding the liquid water droplets of low-level clouds….”
This is of course the point of the CLOUD experiment at CERN, which doesn’t seem to be doing much, but which promises a lot…
“CLOUD is an experiment that uses a cloud chamber to study the possible link between galactic cosmic rays and cloud formation. Based at the Proton Synchrotron at CERN, this is the first time a high-energy physics accelerator has been used to study atmospheric and climate science; the results could greatly modify our understanding of clouds and climate…”
http://public.web.cern.ch/Public/en/Research/CLOUD-en.html
I read the 20 July NYT article (Is the Sun Missing its Spots?) that Harold Ambler linked to in his comment, but it doesn’t mention any recent Svensmark research. Actually, it seems to imply that the data is old : “One possibility proposed a decade ago by Henrik Svensmark and other scientists at the Danish National Space Center in Copenhagen looks to high-energy interstellar particles known as cosmic rays.”
I also note that the 5 paragraphs devoted to Svensmark is followed by 5 paragraphs that either debunk or belittle (“the effect was probably small.”) any effect of cosmic rays. Whereas Hathaway’s hypothesis, the major thrust of the article, is not critically assessed, although he seems to have been overly optimistic. As usual, of course, the NYT authors did manage to garble Hathaway’s research (but at least published the 22 July correction).
Finally, what perturbs me most about the FARS article is not that it is Iranian, but that after reading it I had a clear understanding of Svenmark’s hypothesis. After reading the NYT article, I felt somewhat befuddled, but also comforted – the sun will shine again and it will continue to get warm. That’s good, because we had severe late frosts in Edmonton this Spring and I just finished clearing 3 cm of snow off my walkways. Like superDBA comments above about the snow in Colorado, -5 C and snow in Alberta in early October isn’t unusual, but it isn’t normal either. Actually, the current temperature is about 9 degrees C below normal.
Adolfo Giurfa (13:02:24) :
A real challenge: Anybody out there who could provide data on low altitude cloud cover?….I don´t read arabic!
Arabic language is easy… It is spoken exactly as it is written. However, isn’t it Farsi? 🙂