Recently, Danish physicist Henrik Svensmark was dismissed from DTU Space—the space-research department of the Technical University of Denmark after working there for nearly three decades. Svensmark is best known for his 2007 book, The Chilling Stars: A New Theory of Climate Change.
Read more Anthony Fauci Hurt America’s Children … and Her Future
Let me start out by saying that I am not surprised. Svensmark has been on climate activists’ hit lists his whole career. He committed the sin of failing to genuflect at their altar and profess the climate creed that CO2 is causing catastrophic climate change. In fact, Svensmark is viewed by the climate mafia as much more dangerous to their cause than the typical heretic because he has put forth a creditable theory for climate change that stands in direct competition with their theory that CO2 is the climate control knob.
In many respects, Svensmark is a Copernican-like figure. He has upended the consensus on climate just as Copernicus overturned the Church’s position that the Sun revolved around the Earth. That is how science is supposed to work. A new theory comes along that better explains empirical findings and deposes an older theory. The history of science is replete with examples of long-running feuds between theorists in competing camps. However, the present debate about climate has an added dimension. Environmentalism and its offshoot, climate catastrophism, have become a substitute for traditional religion. Like all religions, it evokes a strong emotional response in its adherents. Svensmark’s challenge to climate dogma is as threatening to the modern-day climate church as the Copernican revolution was to the Church of the Middle Ages.
Svensmark started his intellectual pursuit of what drives climate with the same observation that many others have made, including Will Happer in his paper, Radiation Transport in Clouds. He observed that doubling of CO2 concentrations, a 100% increase, only decreases radiation to space by about 1%, while low cloud cover need only to decrease by a few percent to affect an even greater increase in solar heating of Earth.
So, if changing cloud formation was a factor determining climate, what was driving cloud formation? That is where Svensmark’s brilliance shone through. He was able to determine through experimentation that solar activity modulated cosmic-ray intensity, that in turn modulated cloud formation and global temperature. (Solar activity → cosmic-ray intensity → cloud formation → global temperature.)
Read more Iran is running out the clock to get a weak POTUS
Cosmic rays are high-energy particles originating largely outside the solar system. When they enter Earth’s atmosphere, they ionize air molecules. Svensmark argued that this ionization helps create tiny aerosol particles that can eventually become cloud-condensation nuclei—the seeds around which cloud droplets form. Moreover, the Sun’s magnetic field and solar wind partially shield Earth from cosmic rays. So, a more active Sun blocks more cosmic rays causing fewer cosmic rays to produce fewer low clouds. Fewer low clouds reflect less sunlight back into space, and Earth consequently warms. Conversely, a less active sun permits more cosmic rays to reach the atmosphere, increasing low-cloud cover and cooling the planet. Svensmark not only postulated the theory but ran a lab experiment that vindicated it.
Svensmark’s argument even goes beyond relating the effects of solar activity on Earth’s climate. Our Solar System undertakes a long orbital journey through our galaxy, the Milky Way. It takes roughly 250 million years to complete one orbit around the center of the Milky Way. This is called a galactic year or cosmic year. Svensmark, along with fellow collaborator, Nir Shaviv, observed that cosmic-ray exposure changes as the Solar System travels through the Milky Way. Cosmic rays are produced largely by supernova remnants, which are concentrated around galactic spiral arms. When the Solar System passes through or near a spiral arm, they propose that Earth experiences increased cosmic-ray flux and a greater likelihood of prolonged cool or glacial periods. In essence, one can apply Svensmark’s mechanism across several timescales, short and long.
From my description of Svensmark’s work, one can understand why he poses a threat to the climate consensus. Their efforts to thwart his progress may prove successful in the short-term, but they will fail in the long run. Ultimately, the climate consensus is doomed by virtue of being riddled with inconsistencies and empirical failings.
Read more The real reason Trump agreed to the MOU
Image generated by ChatGPT.