“Why are the public generally unaware of the important research that connects variations in the output of the Sun with climate change?

Because the climate crooks, rent-seekers and liars keep up a barrage of political propaganda, just as the Left-wing mobs drown out the truth by shouting, perhaps?

Well done!
It's time that this additional information was passed to everyone with any sort of interest in climate change.
The key point in the article is that the change is CLIMATIC and that the continual effect of sun spots is to affect the resultant temperature on Earth.

Yes - we ought to take whatever action we can to not increase the climate variables, such as trying to limit man-made effects on the resultant greenhouse gas, but we need to be astute enough to understand the difference between what we can and cannot influence.
But also, we must appreciate the vast implications of climate change upon our civilisation - this change has been happening ever since man came into existence, and it will continue.
All that we can do is to cope with its effects.

None of the above explains the acidification of the oceans which of course is the result of an increase in the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. So for no other reason we should be attempting to reduce our CO2 emissions.
David

There's a new answer for everything. The sea level keeps rising regardless of sunspot activity. The answer to that one is because of volcanoes beneath the Antarctic. That works its way up to Greenland.

There are two factors to considder in relation to the incorrect claim about 'ocean acidification'.

1. The ocean has an almost infinate buffering capacity which will counter any short-term increase in acidification resulting from additional absorbtion of CO2 by the oceans.

2.However as the oceans warm, in accordance with Henry's Law, the oceans as a whole will actually add to atmospheric CO2 as their capacity to absorb and hold it declines.

That is what is happening now.

According to the IPCC,s own figures the oceans are currently responsible for the net addition of some 37.9% of the natural outgassing occuring, which with other natural sources brings total natural additions to atmospheric levels of CO2 to 95.7%.

Man's contributions from burning fossil fuels etc is 4.3%. (IPCC AR5)

It is inconcievable that such a minor component could now be the principle cause of the current warming.

Dear Ian McClintock,

Come on mate, rolling out that tired old chestnut again.

Global atmospheric CO2 levels have gone from under 320 ppm in the sixties to well over 400 ppm today, the highest in 3 to 5 million years. The CO2 budget from fossil fuel burning over that time easily accounts for the increase.

Is it really your contention that sunspot warming or such has heated the oceans to such an extent that it is this that has caused the CO2 increases?

What a load of tripe. So this 'activity' must be more pronounced than any time over the last few million years?

Just listen to yourself.