/sci/ - Science & Math

>>8762300
>>8762305
Let's move on to the third paper, shall we?
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2009GL037946/abstract
>Although controversial, many observations have suggested that low-level cloud cover correlates with the cosmic ray flux. Because galactic cosmic rays have likely decreased in intensity over the last century, this hypothesis, if true, could partly explain 20th century warming, thereby upsetting the consensus view that greenhouse-gas forcing has caused most of the warming.
>In our simulations, changes in CCN from changes in cosmic rays during a solar cycle are two orders of magnitude too small to account for the observed changes in cloud properties; consequently, we conclude that the hypothesized effect is too small to play a significant role in current climate change.

>WE CONCLUDE THAT THE HYPOTHESIZED EFFECT IS TOO SMALL TO PLAY A SIGNIFICANT ROLE IN CURRENT CLIMATE CHANGE

Are you beginning to see a pattern here?