Go to Jack's favorite junkscience conspiracy blog and read the comments by lsvalgaard aka Dr Leif Svalgaard (Solar Physicist) on Svensmark & Shaviv's 2016 paper
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/08...ty-has-a-direct-impact-on-earths-cloud-cover/
The regular wattswussies don't like what he says.
I particularly liked these exchanges:
JohnKnight August 25, 2016 at 3:05 pm
Huh? Wouldn’t things “concerning GCR and clouds” be happening all the time? . . And wouldn’t small changes in total cover/mix of clouds, be essentially impossible to detect/measure at this point in time?
lsvalgaard August 25, 2016 at 3:10 pm
If they are, then we cannot honestly claim that those impossible to measure changes show that GCRs are the main driver of observed climate variation, can we?
JohnKnight August 25, 2016 at 3:20 pm
Of course not, Isvalgaard, but neither can we rightly speak of GCRs not being a significant component in climate variation . . can we?
lsvalgaard August 25, 2016 at 3:36 pm
Yes we can, because there is no real evidence for that. The past several solar cycles, the sun has become quieter and cosmic rays have increased, which should have cooled the climate. Instead it has warmed. So, no evidence of a significant GCR influence.
and this one:
lsvalgaard August 25, 2016 at 3:43 pm
the paper makes no such claim
So, let everybody here proclaim that this latest paper does not show a GCR/Climate link, since not even the authors claim that.
Salvatore Del Prete August 25, 2016 at 3:46 pm
The paper clearly show solar /climate links.
lsvalgaard August 25, 2016 at 4:10 pm
Not according to Svensmark