This is a spectacular demonstration of how Science ought to be done.
Start with the data. Examine it from many sides. See what it says to you. Then formulate questions and eventually a hypothesis. Finally, look for ways to test and enhance the understandings found.
This video was in a posting at WUWT, but as things can move fast there, I’m reproducing it here. (Which will also make it easier for me to find later for reference purposes…)
Of particular interest to me is the discussion in the last half about UV and electric charge variation with solar cycling. Variations on the order of 10% are sufficient to account for a lot of weather variation and those variations are not accounted for in the computer models used by folks such as the IPCC in promoting their Climate Hysteria. That you can get that 10% percent scale variation while total solar output changes on the order of 1/10 of one percent is a very big clue as to mechanism.
That video, though, several times makes reference to “what we saw” in the presentation by Nir Shaviv. I think I’ve found that presentation so I’m including that video first for ‘context’. It, too, is quite good. I’m especially fond of the (roughly 16 minute point) clouds caused by ships at sea.
Prof. Dr. Nir Shaviv video:
The Prof. Dr. Vincent Courtilllot video:
There are a couple of other videos in that series that I’m watching and will likely put up in added postings. At about 1/2 hour each, though, I’m not going to put a dozen of them in one posting!
I do have to say, though, that it’s really nice to see quality science being done from first principles. Data first, then calculate, then validate. Not a computer video game in sight ;-)