.../
Dr Pangloss (Voltaire: ‘Candide’) got a mention in one of the related articles that you linked me to, Bazz. It had to do with the proposition that we live in the best of all possible worlds (a theological proposition). (And in the article referred to as being in one of your links, I think we were being encouraged to set aside our climate hysteria and go out and smell the daisies). However, Candide, Voltaire’s hero, rejects Pangloss’s recurrent optimism: ‘Il faut cultiver notre jardin’ he says finally. Put aside your philosophic ‘best of all possible world’ debates … ‘I must go out and tend my garden’. I suppose Candide was saying that there has to be an end to talk, that in his case he had to get out and tend his orange grove while leaving the debate to those who would – like Pangloss – only debate. ‘Faith without works’? Perhaps Alison Jane was right … she advised going out to walk the dog etc. And I’m just a few moments from getting out to plant some spinach. I suppose that I’m equating Pangloss with ‘deniers’ which I agree could be unfair. That’s my bias and I am trying to operate in spite of it.

Titles of the original papers within your links*:

1. Increased ionization supports growth of aerosols into cloud condensation nuclei
2. Evidence of nearby supernovae affecting life on Earth
3. i) No Experimental Evidence For The Significant Anthropogenic Climate Change
ii) Intensified East Asian winter monsoon during the last geomagnetic reversal transition

*the fourth link was a reprise of what was entailed in your third link and the relevant paper is already linked there, above.

Well Gary, I am no scientist either but I suggest that this hypothesis
may well hold the answer as it answers a number of questions about
hot and cold times in history.
Re the earths magnetic field, the effect of sunspots on it is well
known by people involved in HF radio.
There has only been one denial (whoops there is that word) article
written but it has only been published since July.

It will be interesting to watch. I saw the hypoyhesis mentioned on
TV today.

AlanB. You have failed to justify your assertion of”old men with money and power."
Understandable, from an old man. Like yourself, with no money, no power, and afflicted with verbal diarrhoea.You are incapable of any sense, but continue to inflict your nonsense on the thread,

Gary; As the Turku Uni findings were only published in July this year
it will probably take a while before the conventional proponents of
human caused global warming all get to hear of it and build up a
rejection pressure.
Here is another reference to the theory, but not to Turku or Kobe.

http://jennifermarohasy.com/2019/10/towards-a-new-theory-of-climate-with-a-new-book/

As JM seems to be a favorite target that might get the discussion going.
If the discussion becomes a controversy imagine the steam generated
in parliament. If it turns out to be the answer, think of the $Tillion
that has been wasted on a wrong turning.
All the government regulations that will have to be repealed.
All the UN decisions and CO2 conference junkets that were pointless.

Because of all embedded decisions and expected loss of face, I think
the Sun/cosmic ray/cloud theory will be rejected out of hand.
Further to what I previously wrote there was another cycle in the
whole theory; the Milankovitch cycles.
So, sun/sunspots/cosmic rays/clouds/Milankovitch cycles so a lot of
computer programming needed for that ! Hi !

Despite the complete lack of science to support the assertions of the promoters of the AGW fraud, and the demonstration of the invalidity of the asserted “science” of the fraudulent Michael Mann, the fraud promoters,as suggested by Bazz, should have another opportunity to present their pitiful assertions,before general acceptance that they are fraudulent, beyond doubt.
It would be appropriate for Michael Mann to be prosecuted for fraud as an outcome of his baseless case against Ball.

Oh for goodness sake, stop contemplating your navels.

1. Climate change is natural and real
2. Climate change driven by carbon dioxide emissions is NOT uncontested, is NOT accepted bay 97% of the worlds climate scientists ( except those 1500 IPCC elites)
3. the statistical link between C02 and Temp is as strong as that as the cost of a US standard postal stamp and temp.. Cause as postulated by Plass back in his 1956 theory has not been proven.

Forget this distraction and focus on real issues like population, resources, land degradation, deforestation, water quality, sanitation... basic stuff, not climate fantasies of Hollywood. Which the climate cultists bon voyage on their nit-picking and step back from their intentional emotional jibes. Relax, step back and breath.. its a good planet to live on, despite all the inhumane things governments do in the name of their " cult-driven" actions.