Study: Strongest hurricanes striking US three times more frequently

Jack Hays said:

This is from the Chairman of the Raccah Center for Physics at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and IBM Einstein Fellow at the Institute for Advanced Study, Professor Nir Shaviv.

[h=2]How Climate Change Pseudoscience Became Publicly Accepted[/h]

Click to expand...

Ohlookablog

Jack Hays said:

The blog is his own. I suggest you peruse its contents.
Shaviv has published repeatedly in leading journals. His most recent (2017) significant climate work was co-authored with Henrik Svensmark and published in Nature Communications.
His link to the Institute for Advanced Study is worth highlighting. That is where Albert Einstein worked after coming to the U.S.
And no, he's not been "disproved."

[h=2]Solar Debunking Arguments are Defunct[/h][h=2]Forbes censored an interview with me[/h]

Click to expand...

The fact the blog is his own creates even more bias and concern for me. I still hold true that his claims can be refuted quite easily by more than hundreds upon hundreds of leading climate scientists.

My concern is in his presentation of facts....
- He claims solar activity is increasing that is FALSE it has been decreasing since the 1950s (This debunks this notion- https://archive.is/usnF)
- There are numerous and substantial claims he is involved and being paid by the fossil fuel industry....whether factual or not is concerning until proven not guilty
- The Heartland Institute of whom Shaviv regularly speaks for and is involved within a Senate inquiry to be directly involved with fossil fuel firms.

goldkam said:

The fact the blog is his own creates even more bias and concern for me. I still hold true that his claims can be refuted quite easily by more than hundreds upon hundreds of leading climate scientists.

My concern is in his presentation of facts....
- He claims solar activity is increasing that is FALSE it has been decreasing since the 1950s (This debunks this notion- https://archive.is/usnF)
- There are numerous and substantial claims he is involved and being paid by the fossil fuel industry....whether factual or not is concerning until proven not guilty
- The Heartland Institute of whom Shaviv regularly speaks for and is involved within a Senate inquiry to be directly involved with fossil fuel firms.

Click to expand...

The claim of fossil fuel payments boils down to an honorarium for a speech to the Heartland Institute. It's an absurd stretch to make that into something worrisome.
As for solar activity, I'm afraid you're in error. Solar activity increased through the 20th century. We'll start with this.

Carbon Dioxide or Solar Forcing?

[FONT=&quot]Using historic variations in climate and the cosmic ray flux, one can actually [/FONT]quantify empirically[FONT=&quot] the relation between cosmic ray flux variations and global temperature change, and estimate the solar contribution to the 20[/FONT][FONT=&quot]th[/FONT][FONT=&quot] century warming. This contribution comes out to be 0.5±0.2°C out of the observed 0.6±0.2°C global warming (Shaviv, 2005).[/FONT][FONT=&quot] Fig. 5: Solar activity over the past several centuries can be reconstructed using different proxies. These reconstructions demonstrate that 20th century activity is unparalleled over the past 600 years (previously high solar activity took place around 1000 years ago, and 8000 yrs ago). Specifically, we see sunspots and 10Be. The latter is formed in the atmosphere by ~1GeV cosmic rays, which are modulated by the solar wind (stronger solar wind → less galactic cosmic rays → less 10Be production). Note that both proxies do not capture the decrease in the high energy cosmic rays that took place since the 1970's, but which the ion chamber data does (see fig. 6). (image source: Wikipedia)
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Fig. 6: The flux of cosmic rays reaching Earth, as measured by ion chambers. Red line - annual averages, Blue line - 11 yr moving average. Note that ion chambers are sensitive to particles at relatively high energy (several 10's of GeV, which is higher than the energies responsible for the atmospheric ionization [~10 GeV], and much higher than the energies responsible for the 10Be production [~1 GeV]). Plot redrawn using data from Ahluwalia (1997). Moreover, the decrease in high energy cosmic rays since the 1970's is less pronounced in low energy proxies of solar activity, implying that cosmogenic isotopes (such as 10Be) or direct solar activity proxies (e.g., sun spots, aa index, etc) are less accurate in quantifying the solar → cosmic ray → climate link and its contribution to 20th century global warming.
[/FONT]