Talk:Cloud condensation nuclei

Physics Low‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Weather: Climate Mid‑importance

	Weather portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Weather, which collaborates on weather and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details. Articles Requested Project Resources Become a Member Project Talk Assessment A-Class Alerts WeatherWikipedia:WikiProject WeatherTemplate:WikiProject WeatherWeather articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Climate task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Shouldn't the article mention the (proposed) relationship between cosmic rays and cloud formation? I created a stub at Scientific uncertainty, and the first google hit I found said led me to solar variability, solar wind, and a 2002 peer review paper. It hypothesized that "the cosmic ray-induced global cloud changes could be the long-sought mechanism connecting solar and climate variability". [1]

Is this old news, i.e., a hypothesis which has already been disproved, or what? --Uncle Ed (talk) 18:03, 5 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

Its still very uncertain, ythough tending towards "no", but its discussed best at Cosmic_rays#Role_in_climate_change I think, so have linked it. Sorry you had to sacrifice SU to get it :-( William M. Connolley (talk) 21:15, 5 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

With this being wikipedia and all, unless there's consensus concerning the issue, we'd have to lean no for the time being. If it ever gets greater support, that would all change of course. Thegreatdr (talk) 23:35, 5 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

It is relativity old news, and has been disproved for recent times. If you read Recent oppositely directed trends in solar climate forcings and the global mean surface air temperature from the Royal Society you will see that this is not a cause of global warming. You can also read synopses of the article at New Scientist - Sun's activity rules out link to global warming, Telegraph - Sun not responsible for climate change, Guardian - New analysis counters claims that solar activity is linked to global warming, and BBC - 'No Sun link' to climate change. --Shagie (talk) 23:38, 5 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

Merge to atmospheric particulate?

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

There is so little information here, is it worth merging this to Atmospheric particulate matter for now?--NHSavage (talk) 18:50, 21 July 2012 (UTC)Reply

Wiki Education assignment: CHEM 300

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 6 September 2022 and 7 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Kyall P, Ishachahal, KZhengUBC (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Sach548, Elbert Ainsteinium, Sliverash, Sganz3, Bouchiechan, Jerms24.

— Assignment last updated by Tiff592 (talk) 00:21, 27 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

Add topic