1. ISSN 1019 3316, Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 2013, Vol. 83, No. 3, pp. 275–285. © Pleiades Publishing, Ltd., 2013.
Original Russian Text © S.V. Avakyan, 2013, published in Vestnik Rossiiskoi Akademii Nauk, 2013, Vol. 83, No. 5, pp. 425–436.
Environmental Problems
The author associates the recently observed climate warming and carbon dioxide concentration growth in the
lower atmospheric layers with variations of solar–geomagnetic activity in global cloud formation and the sig
nificant decrease in the role of forests in carbon dioxide accumulation in the process of photosynthesis. The
contribution of the greenhouse effect of carbon bearing gases to global warming turns out to be insignificant.
DOI: 10.1134/S1019331613030015
The Role of Solar Activity in Global Warming
S. V. Avakyan*
More than 40 years ago, in the fall of 1972, the first
All Union conference “Solar–Atmospheric Correla
tions in Climate Theory and Weather Forecasts” was
held in Moscow. It adopted a resolution that formu
lated still topical problems and objectives. The confer
ence stated [1, p. 463],
Studies on the Sun–atmosphere problem, which
have been performed in the Soviet Union and abroad
for several decades, make it possible to regard as
proved the existence of a considerable influence of
solar activity and other cosmic and geophysical fac
tors on atmospheric processes. Consequently, studies
on this problem are of high practical significance ….
In May 1973, the Hydrometeorological Service
Headquarters organized the Scientific Council on
Solar–Atmospheric Correlations in Weather Fore
casts; before this, the Laboratory of Solar–Terrestrial
Correlations at the Hydrometeorological Center was
opened. However, it is becoming obvious that the then
natural science was short of the necessary data about
the environment. Moreover, meteorologists and cli
matologists were not prepared for taking into account
solar activity.
Today the scientific world enjoys a significantly
larger reserve of knowledge about the nature and
intensity of solar–geomagnetic disturbances and their
manifestations in the environment, including the bio
sphere and human beings. On the other hand, the
problem of the global increase in the mean surface
temperature and the concentration of carbon dioxide
(CO2) in the lower atmosphere, which is believed to be
the main source of the greenhouse effect, has been dis
cussed at all levels for more than two decades. In 2004,
our country ratified the Kyoto Protocol, designed to
decrease emissions of greenhouse gases, including
CO2, but suspended its participation in the protocol’s
realization not long ago. The point is that the switch of
world powers first to decreasing the use of fossil fuel
* Sergei Vazgenovich Avakyan, Dr. Sci. (Phys.–Math.), is head of
the Laboratory of Aerospace Physical Optics at the Vavilov State
Optical Institute and a leading researcher of the RAS Chief
(Pulkovo) Astronomical Observatory.
and then to carbon free energy within the framework
of the Kyoto Protocol may lead to economic collapse
for Russia as a consequence of the reduction and,
probably, even loss of the possibility to sell oil and nat
ural gas on the world market. The basis for this con
cern is that our most important industries (defense,
aerospace, heavy engineering) have been in crisis for
decades.
THE IONOSPHERE AS A CURRENT SOLAR
ACTIVITY SIGNAL GENERATOR
The modern science of climatology gives no answer
sufficiently accurate and reliable for practical applica
tions to the question of what the main cause of the cur
rent climate warming is and of how this process will
develop in the near future. To date, the main difficulty
has been to assess the role of variations in solar activity.
As a rule, all attempts to account for the contribution
of solar–cosmic factors to the external impact on the
weather–climate system are reduced to considering
variations in the full flux of solar radiant energy or cos
mic rays. However, the changes in both are very insig
nificant.
It is worth recalling in this respect the constant
value of the main part of the Sun’s radiant energy flux
(this value is called the solar constant) coming to the
lower atmosphere, the troposphere. This flux is now
342 W m–2 with account for the Earth’s sphericity.
According to the current assumptions, changes in the
solar constant value outside the atmosphere during
both the 11 year cycle of solar activity and secular
variations do not exceed 0.1% (at least, for the last
300 years).
In studying the contribution of solar activity to
weather and climate change, we proposed to account
for well known variations in electromagnetic radiation
in the most shortwave and changeable part of the spec
trum—the extreme ultraviolet (EUV) and X ray
ranges. These variations are accompanied by distur
bances in geomagnetic activity associated with cor
puscular solar activity, under which electron and pro
275

2. 276
AVAKYAN
ton fluxes, coming from the Earth’s radiation belts,
penetrate the ionosphere. However, the stumbling
stone for the Sun–weather–climate problem was the
absence of a mechanism that would explain how the
energy of solar impacts on the upper atmosphere
(Earth’s ionosphere at heights of 60–500 km), where
both solar shortwave radiation and the fluxes of cor
puscles from the radiation belts were fully absorbed,
could manifest itself in the troposphere, i.e., in its
weather–climatic characteristics.
Upon proposing such a mechanism, we were able
to consider as the basis for solar variability impacts on
weather–climatic characteristics the ionizing radia
tion of solar flares and corpuscular precipitations
under geomagnetic disturbances rather than cosmic
rays, both galactic (GCRs) and solar (SCRs). In fact,
these factors of solar–geomagnetic activity—flares
and geomagnetic storms—prevail both by energy and,
what is more important, by recurrence. Indeed, up to
50 solar flares of the M5 class and higher and 20–70
geomagnetic storms with Кр = 6 and more occur
(depending on the phase of the 11 year solar cycle)
yearly on average. At the same time, a GCR decrease
is observed several times a year at a level of less than 3%
and once a year at a level of 20%, while SCRs are reg
istered in the earth’s orbit five times a year on average
as a proton flux emerges with an energy higher than
100 MeV.
All the fluxes that change considerably depending
on the level of solar–geomagnetic activity and ionize
the earth’s upper atmosphere lose their energy in the
ionosphere, bringing it into a state of high excitation.
Then, if there is a channel transmitting this excitation
directly to the troposphere, where the weather and cli
mate are formed, significant correlations of meteoro
logical characteristics with solar activity factors must
be present, including global climatic changes.
The purpose of our research was to determine the
role of the Sun’s influence on the global warming of the
surface air, already observable for more than 35 years.
There is still no convincing evidence of anthropogenic
impact on the current climate change. However, such
studies have always encountered two formidable barri
ers. First, in discussing energy problems of the solar–
magnetospheric impact on weather–climatic charac
teristics, scientists usually emphasize the necessity to
look for indirect or trigger mechanisms that transmit
the effects of variations in solar–geomagnetic activity
to the troposphere to obtain meteorologically signifi
cant changes in it. The point is that the energy of any
changeable part of the solar spectrum is very small rel
ative to the mean energy of atmospheric formations
(for example, a cyclone). Second, as was mentioned,
all the most significant energy fluxes coming from solar
flares and occurring during geomagnetic storms fully
dissipate in the earth’s ionosphere. This is why we
should view the earth’s ionosphere as the most natural
and effective element of the indirect mechanism of
solar–atmospheric correlations.
Earlier, we showed the substantial role of the iono
sphere in heliogeobiocorrelations [2] owing to the
introduction of a new agent of solar–terrestrial corre
lations—ionospheric microwave radiation—which
emerges in transitions between highly excited (Ryd
berg) states of all ionospheric components. The studies
were based on the experience of modeling disturbances
in the ionosphere under the action of solar flares and
electron precipitation from radiation belts during geo
magnetic storms and under various artificial impacts.
These disturbances manifest themselves when
recording the degree of ionization of the upper atmo
sphere by the radio sounding method and during opti
cal studies, including visual–instrumental observa
tions of ionospheric glow from manned space vehicles.
To construct more accurate and advanced models of
ionospheric disturbances, we were the first to intro
duce in aeronomy the following three high threshold
energy processes, known from the physics of atomic
collisions: the Auger effect; the double photoioniza
tion of the outer electron shell; and the excitation of
highly excited (Rydberg) states by the impact of ener
getic ionospheric electrons—photoelectrons, second
ary electrons, and Auger electrons. The role of these
processes under solar flares and magnetic storms
sharply increases because of the hardening of the spec
tra of the flux of quanta and electrons that ionize the
upper atmosphere.
THE RADIO OPTICAL THREE STEP TRIGGER
MECHANISM OF SOLAR–TROPOSPHERIC
CORRELATIONS
It is stressed in [3] that the change in solar radiation
as a climate forming factor requires special attention,
although we are still far from understanding possible
mechanisms that strengthen the influence of solar
activity on the climate. More and more experimental
evidence appears daily to prove the connection of
heliogeophysical factors with weather–climatic phe
nomena, including hazardous ones, such as hurri
canes. As the main cause of weather changes in the
lower atmosphere, we consider the condensation
mechanism, including the important contribution of
microwave radiation caused by high solar activity in
the form of shortwave flares and radio bursts. This is
based on experimental facts concerning the impact of
microwave radiation on the condensation mechanism
[4, 5]: by observing variations in the atmosphere’s
optical transparency and a number of weather charac
teristics from a high altitude observatory, it was dis
covered that they were connected with solar micro
wave radiation bursts and, what was even more impor
tant, with solar flares themselves. It was established
that such impacts resulted in the formation of water
clusters, owing to which cluster absorption bands
HERALD OF THE RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES
Vol. 83
No. 3
2013

3. THE ROLE OF SOLAR ACTIVITY IN GLOBAL WARMING
emerged and deepened in the near ultraviolet region of
wavelengths, and the spectral optical atmospheric
depth decreased in the visible and IR regions (as well
as in the absorption bands of water vapors).
On the other hand, the Radiophysical Research
Institute in Nizhni Novgorod registered sporadic rises
in the intensity of ionospheric microwave radiation
during solar flares and auroras (during geomagnetic
storms and substorms) [6]. Note that the intensity dur
ing the flares exceeded many times the typical micro
wave bursts of solar origin. The nature of such a signal
(radiation in dipole transitions between highly
excited—Rydberg—levels with the principal quan
tum number n ~ 10–20 and with orbital quantum
number change to 1) was disclosed in our works of the
mid 1990s [7]. In 2002, the important role of this
“Rydberg” mechanism of microwave generation by
the disturbed ionosphere was confirmed experimen
tally for the first time at the Radiophysical Research
Institute on the Sura heating bench (under radio wave
absorption at frequencies of 4.7–6.8 MHz), when the
observed microwave radiation of the ionosphere at a
frequency of 600 MHz [8] was interpreted physically
and fully on the basis of our work [7].
These results made it possible to propose a
radiooptical three step trigger mechanism of solar–
magnetospheric control over weather–climatic phe
nomena [9]. This mechanism makes it possible to
account for the contribution of variations in the solar
flux of ionizing radiation in EUV and X ray ranges, as
well as during solar flares, and the contribution of cor
puscular fluxes from radiation belts and directly from
the magnetosphere under geomagnetic disturbances,
as well as during geomagnetic storms. According to
our estimates, the flux of microwaves from the iono
sphere may reach 10–11 W cm–2 during a strong mag
netic storm, while being 10–100 times lower during
solar flares.
When we study the possibility of the radiooptical
mechanism’s contribution to the current climate
change, we pay attention in the first place to the global
warming of the surface air, observed over the last sev
eral decades. One of V.I. Vernadsky’s basic theses is
taken into account here [10, p. 95]:
The main and decisive part of scientific knowledge is
facts and their major and minor empirical generali
zations. Scientific theories and hypotheses, despite
their importance in current scientific work, are
beyond the scope of the main and decisive part of sci
entific knowledge. The main importance of hypoth
eses and theories is but appearance.
Figure 1 shows a diagram of the radiooptical trigger
mechanism. Note that the first part of the term
radiooptical implies introducing in ionosphere physics
a new (“Rydberg”) mechanism of generating radio
radiation of the Earth’s ionosphere in the microwave
range (wavelengths expressed in millimeters, centime
HERALD OF THE RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES
Stage I
Transformation of the ionospheric
solar and geomagnetic energy
factors into a microwave flux
that penetrates
Earth’s surface
Stage II
277
Regulating the formation and
destruction of cluster ions
by microwave radiation
Participation of clusters
in the formation of cloud
and aerosol layers that reflect and
absorb the Sun’s radiant energy
flux and heat flux from the underlying surface
Stage III
Fig. 1. General diagram of the radiooptical three step trig
ger effect of solar–geomagnetic factors on tropospheric
characteristics.
ters, and decimeters), disturbed under the action of
the ionizing radiation of a flare on the Sun or by elec
trons precipitating into the ionosphere during mag
netic storms (auroras). The “optical” part of the
mechanism is connected with accounting for the
impact of both flares on the Sun and solar microwave
radio bursts on the content of water vapors in the
atmospheric column. This phenomenon was discov
ered in the 1980s during high altitude observations (at
a height of 2.1 km near Kislovodsk) by associates of the
Atmospheric Physics Department of Leningrad State
University under the supervision of Academician
K.Ya. Kondrat’ev [4, 5]. The authors interpreted these
observations as the actuation of a condensation–clus
ter mechanism with the formation of cluster com
plexes from water vapors. This was confirmed by
recording the emerging and deepening cluster absorp
tion bands in the area of wavelengths of 320–330, 360,
380–390, 410, and 480 nm.
In interpreting the data of laboratory experiments
with clusters from water vapors and carbon dioxide, as
well as in the area of atmospheric densities, “colli
sional dissociative recombination” was proposed as
the main process of cluster ion breakdown in the pres
ence of molecular gas [11]. It was shown that the dis
sociation rate coefficients largely depended on the
value of the orbital moment l of the Rydberg level dur
ing collision: the probability of dissociation increases
for low l values and, correspondingly, it becomes low at
large l values. Consequently, during solar radiation
bursts and, even more so, during sporadic rises in the
intensity of the ionosphere’s microwave Rydberg radi
ation (during solar UV and X ray flares and geomag
netic storms), we will observe the filling of Rydberg
levels with higher l values in the process of “collisional
dissociative recombination,” induced by the absorp
tion of the strengthened microwave radiation flux,
and, as a result, a decrease in the probability of the dis
sociation of cluster ions of the lower atmosphere.
Vol. 83
No. 3
2013

4. 278
AVAKYAN
Thus, a new role of microwave radiation is suggested in
microprocesses in the Earth’s lower atmosphere with
the participation of water cluster ions: the influence on
the probability of these clusters' dissociation through
the “collisional dissociative recombination” mecha
nism ensuring the emergence of high Rydberg electron
state orbital quantum number values (emerging under
the absorption of microwave radiation quanta of both
the Sun and the ionosphere). Dissociation rate coeffi
cients depend on the energy of quanta (and, conse
quently, on the wavelength) of the absorbed microwave
radiation. This leads to the deceleration of the rate of
the primary reaction of cluster ion destruction and, as
a consequence, to an increase in their concentration
in the troposphere.
Proceeding from [4, 5], as well as from studies that
confirm the important role of highly excited (Ryd
berg) states in the processes of association of large
molecules and clusters and the dissociative recombi
nation of cluster ions [for example, 11], we may state
that the microwave flux prompts a growing concentra
tion of water vapor clusters in the troposphere, which
is accompanied by the formation of optically thin
clouds (initially, condensation haze).
Let us stress that all the steps of the proposed
mechanism are confirmed experimentally: iono
spheric microwave radiation, amplified during solar
flares and magnetic storms, was discovered [6]; the
core role of the Rydberg mechanism of microwave
ionospheric radiation was proved by direct radiophys
ical active impacts on the Earth’s ionosphere in
domestic experiments by scientists at the Radiophysi
cal Research Institute on the Sura heating bench [8];
humidity regulation at altitudes higher than 2 km by
both solar radiation and solar flares [4, 5] was proved;
and the direct influence of solar flares and magnetic
storms on overcast weather was clearly fixed [12].
The cloud cover generated anew after solar flares
and geomagnetic storms is in its initial form a medium
transmitting more than 90% of the incoming solar
radiation flux. However, it intercepts about half of the
thermal radiation going to space from the underlying
surface. This is why such optically thin clouds are
warming. Their increased formation after flares on the
Sun and global magnetic storms (and, on the whole, in
periods of high solar–geomagnetic activity), accord
ing to the radiooptical mechanism, is the main cause
of the current global warming, connected with the
epoch of the maxima of secular (quasi centenary and
quasi bicentenary) cycles of heliogeophysical activity.
A good confirmation of the correctness of this
approach is data of the UW HIRAS satellite experi
ment, during which, during the centenary maximum
of solar activity (measured in 1979–2001), a 10–15%
increased overcast content compared to all other satel
lite experiments was registered (because the HIRAS
equipment can additionally record semitransparent
cirrus clouds). Earlier, in [13] the necessity to study
optically thin cirrus clouds was emphasized, especially
“thin and invisible cirrus clouds” and primarily in the
liquid–drop fraction because it was at this stage that
the cloud layer caused a substantial warming of the
subcloud layer of the atmosphere. In compliance with
the radiooptical mechanism, such cloud generations
are preceded by the formation of a practically invisible
condensation haze under the clusterization of water
vapors in the field of microwaves from the ionosphere
during solar flares and magnetic storms.
The proposed mechanism of the emergence of
incipient, optically thin, and actually cirrus, cloudi
ness during solar flares and geomagnetic storms allows
us to outline the vectors of powerful effects of solar–
geomagnetic activity on cyclogenesis. Indeed, accord
ing to [14], specifying in simulation models the pres
ence of cirrus clouds with an area of about 1.2 ×
1.2 km, for example, in the wake of an anticyclone,
reduces most strongly (up to 2 hPa) the surface atmo
spheric pressure and, above all, shifts its further trajec
tory. This is what happens in the middle latitudes,
while, for the subarctic zone, the largest impact on
such a change in the path of an anticyclone is caused
by the emergence of cirrus clouds in the center and in
the frontal part of the anticyclone. To change the
atmosphere’s circulation regime associated with the
generation of the kinetic energy of atmospheric
motions, it is necessary to spend 2.5–5 W m–2 [14].
Thus, with the emergence of optically thin cloudiness,
we observe changes not only in the radio–thermal
regime (owing to the warming properties of this cloud
iness) but also in the dynamics of the atmosphere
(characteristics of cyclones and anticyclones).
CAUSES OF THE MODERN GLOBAL
WARMING
Obviously, to confirm the importance of the mech
anism of solar–tropospheric correlations, it is neces
sary to explain the observed dependence of weather–
climatic effects on the Sun’s cyclic activity. Meteorol
ogists, as well as some geophysicists, study the correla
tions of weather–climatic characteristics with the uni
versally recognized solar activity parameters—Wolf
numbers (associated with sunspot formation activity)
and with temporal variations of the total electromag
netic solar radiation flux—the solar constant. The
result turns out to be negative: there are no significant
correlations with meteorological parameters either in
Wolf numbers or in the variability of the solar constant.
This gave grounds for a skeptical attitude to the possi
ble influence of solar–geomagnetic activity factors on
weather and climate [15].
Indeed, in studying the correlation of surface air
temperature (in Moscow, Leningrad, and Oslo) with
Wolf numbers, it was obtained that temperature does
HERALD OF THE RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES
Vol. 83
No. 3
2013

5. THE ROLE OF SOLAR ACTIVITY IN GLOBAL WARMING
not oscillate with a period of 11 years—the main solar
activity cycle; instead, stable variations were observed
in a range of 2–5.5 years [15]. However, within the
radiooptical three step trigger mechanism, this result
is quite understandable: an increase in the warming
(optically thin) cloudiness takes place owing to the
increased flux of microwaves from the ionosphere both
under the action of solar flares and during magnetic
storms. The 11 year cycle has two maxima of the prob
ability of such flares and two maxima of the probability
of such storms, and, as a rule, they do not coincide
[16]. As a result, over 11 years, two very powerful
microwave impacts on the content of water vapor in
the troposphere (with cluster coagulation) take place:
during magnetic storms and, usually less intensive,
during solar flares, primarily within intervals between
the maxima of geomagnetic storms. This explains the
spread of the periods from 2 to 5.5 years in the temper
ature maxima observed in Moscow, Leningrad, and
Oslo [15, 17].
A result important for year to year variations of
hydrological processes was obtained in [18], which, in
particular, specified the same 2 to 4 year quasi period
among those associated by the authors with the gravi
tational effect of the Jupiter–Venus pair. Note that
periods in the 2 to 6 year range for precipitation in
Oslo manifest themselves in the data of an earlier work
[17] as well. To all appearances, we should seek the
channels of the influence of solar–geomagnetic cyclic
activity on hydrological processes within the radioop
tical mechanism primarily with account for the effect
of precipitation stimulated from lower clouds under
the emergence of optically thin clouds after flares and
magnetic storms. As was shown in [14], an analog of
such clouds, cirrus clouds, may “seed” lower clouds
with their crystals and cause precipitation.
As is known, in addition to the 11 year cycle of
solar activity, there are longer cycles. We substantiated
the decisive influence of secular cycles of solar–geo
magnetic activity on the global rise in surface air tem
perature (global warming) observed over the last sev
eral decades [19]. We managed to do this on the basis
of the concept of the radiooptical three step trigger
mechanism. We analyzed, first, the trends in the main
indices of solar and geomagnetic activity and, second,
the experimental results of the global distribution of
the full (total) cloudiness, obtained from satellites
starting from the first half of the 1980s. It turned out
that all key effects of the total secular cycle of solar–
geomagnetic activity were reflected in the behavior of
global cloudiness (Fig. 2). For example, the global
cloudiness maximum in 1985–1987 fell on the secular
maximum of the Sun’s electromagnetic (1985) and
corpuscular (1987) activity [20], while the second
maximum (late 2003) coincided with the absolute
maximum of geomagnetic activity (the number of
geomagnetic storms) over the entire observation
HERALD OF THE RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES
279
period (more than 100 years). It is clear from Fig. 2
that the decrease in the global spread of cloudiness
after 1987 and 2003 is in full accord, due to the action
of the radiooptical mechanism, with the decrease in
the Sun’s activity, by the flux in the soft X ray and
extreme ultraviolet ranges starting from 1985 (Figs. 3
[21] and 4 [22]), and that in geomagnetic storm activ
ity is by the flux of electrons precipitating from radia
tion belts starting from 2004 (Fig. 5).
Indeed, the decrease in these fluxes reduces the
intensity of the ionosphere’s microwave radiation and,
consequently, slows down the condensation–cluster
process in the troposphere, i.e., cloud generation. This
is confirmed by the growth of the water vapor content
in the troposphere column, registered in 1986–1999
[23]. Starting from 1999–2000, this value began
decreasing again, while the global cloudiness began
growing. Importantly, the data of [24] about the rela
tion between the lower cloudiness and the upper
cloudiness plus the middle ones over the period from
2000 through 2004, when the number of geomagnetic
storms was growing up to the absolute secular maxi
mum (Fig. 5), show a sharp (two time) increase in the
contribution of clouds of the upper and middle levels
to the total cloudiness compared to the 1985–1999
period, which is again in full compliance with the
increase in the contribution of the radiooptical mech
anism to the transformation of water vapors into clus
ters under the action of the increased flux of micro
waves from the ionosphere. Consequently, in the
absence of direct measurement results of the optical
thickness of the global cloudiness, the data about the
permanent excess of the upper–middle cloudiness
over the lower one may be viewed as evidence that the
reduction of the total global cloudiness, registered
starting from 1987, is primarily determined by the
decrease in the number of optically thin (warming)
clouds, which determines the decrease in the contri
bution of solar–geomagnetic activity effects to the
surface air warming.
However, it was from 1985–1986 when we observed
the considerable increase in the flux of long wave radi
ation, going to space from the atmosphere and the
underlying surface [25]. Within the concept of the
radiooptical mechanism, this confirms the reduction
of the optically thin cloudiness, which confines well
the Earth’s thermal radiation but almost freely trans
mits the principal flux of solar radiant energy. This dif
ferentiates it from thick clouds, which confine visible
and shortwave radiation coming to the Earth’s tropo
sphere and surface. This is why the daytime thick
cloudiness is cooling.
In [25] we find the following data on the energy
evolution of the Earth’s general radiation balance
between 1985 and 2003: overall, the growth of outgo
ing longwave radiation (OLR) over this period was
~15 W m–2, and the outgoing shortwave radiation
Vol. 83
No. 3
2013

6. 280
AVAKYAN
Cloudiness, %
71
70
TSI
68
December 2009
69
R
67
1
66
2
65
64
15/07/10
15/07/09
15/07/08
15/07/06
15/07/05
15/07/04
15/07/03
15/07/02
15/07/01
15/07/00
15/07/99
15/07/98
15/07/97
15/07/96
15/07/95
15/07/94
15/07/93
15/07/92
15/07/91
15/07/90
15/07/89
15/07/88
15/07/87
15/07/86
15/07/85
15/07/84
15/07/83
63
15/07/07
4
3
Fig. 2. Remotely sensed changes in the area of global full (summary) cloudiness [http://isccp.giss.nasa.gov/climanal7.html].
The upper curve is the current course of the solar constant, or the total solar irradiance (TSI). The middle curve is the averaged
monthly number of sunspots (R). The lower graph shows monthly averages; the proposed linear approximation in four time inter
vals confirms the influence of secular trends in individual factors of solar–geomagnetic activity: the EUV flux and the Sun’s soft
X ray radiation, the number of X ray flares, the number of geomagnetic storms, and the impact of their joint reduction after 2003:
(1) the period from 1983 to 1985–1987: growing cloudiness owing to the increasing shortwave activity of the Sun and geomagnetic
activity (the number of global magnetic storms); (2) the period from 1987 to 2000: the decrease in the Sun’s EUV radiation flux
and the number of solar flares; (3) the period from 2000 to 2003: geomagnetic activity growth until the end of 2003; (4) the period
from 2004: the general drop in the number of global magnetic storms and solar shortwave electromagnetic activity.
mW m−2
6
Sun’s EUV radiation flux
5
Flares
30
4
20
3
10
2
0
1
0
1980
1985
1990
1995
≥ M4
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2000
Fig. 3. Changes in the current flux of the Sun’s ionizing
extreme ultraviolet (EUV) radiation in 1976–2003.
Fig. 4. Time variations in the number of solar X ray flares
of ≥M4 observed per month in 1975–2003.
(OSR) decreased by ~10 W m–2. This agrees with our
estimation of the impact of the radiooptical mecha
nism. Indeed, the decrease in overcast skies from the
maximum of solar activity in 1985–1987 through
2000 was 4–5% (see Fig. 1). At a mean cloud albedo
of 0.5–0.8 and taking into account the Earth’s sphe
ricity, 342 W m–2 × (0.04–0.05) × (0.5–0.8) = 6.8–
13.7 W m ⎯2. This is a forecast value by which the value
of the outgoing shortwave radiation is reduced. On
average, it is just ~10 W m–2, which agrees with the
results of satellite data analysis performed in [25].
Therefore, the anomalous growth of the outgoing
longwave radiation indicates, in our opinion (in line
with the radiooptical mechanism), not a stable global
warming, as the author wrote in [25], but, on the con
trary, a sharp drop in the contribution of the optically
thin cloudiness (which keeps the lower layers of the
troposphere) and, consequently, a reduced role of the
secular maximum of solar activity to the warming
effect.
HERALD OF THE RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES
Vol. 83
No. 3
2013

7. Magnetic storms
THE ROLE OF SOLAR ACTIVITY IN GLOBAL WARMING
281
1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
75 11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
200
70
150
65
60
100
1
55
50
50
0
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
1865 1875 1885 1895 1905 1915 1925 1935 1945 1955 1965 1975 1985 1995 2005
Fig. 5. Smoothed monthly numbers of sunspots (upper curve 1), ordinal numbers of 11 year cycles from 11th to 24th, and the
annual number of magnetic storms (histogram) [http://www.geomag.bgs.ac.uk/education/earthmag.html].
We should stress that the analysis of the results of
perennial ground based measurements of the value of
solar radiation that came through the Earth’s atmo
sphere allows us to speak not only about its minimum
in 1985 but also about the presence (although with a
high degree of uncertainty) of a negative centenary
trend in its value practically since 1900 [22]. However,
this also agrees qualitatively with the secular course of
solar–geomagnetic activity. If we consider indirect
data as well, then, strictly speaking, warming has
already been observed for 300 years, following the
growth of solar activity since the beginning of the 17th
century.
Recent years have seen a change in the direction of
another cosmophysical influence on climate—the
intensity of the GCRs. The galactic cosmic rays can
actively participate in the formation of optically thick
clouds of the lower layer, which, as a rule, lead to the
cooling of the surface air. Therefore, GCR growth leads
to an increase in cooling cloudiness, and, consequently,
this process takes part in the weakening of global warm
ing [16, 19]. The growth of intensity of cosmic rays has
already been observed since about 1999–2000, the last
solar maximum (Fig. 6), although until then their flux
was decreasing throughout the 20th century.
Thus, several trends observed in the past decade
may indicate the near end of the period characterized
by the contribution of the natural, solar, component to
global climate warming [16].
Modern science still does not allow us to forecast
with practical accuracy the rate of the coming cooling.
This is due to problems with knowledge about the vari
ability mechanisms of solar activity. However, the main
HERALD OF THE RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES
point is that it is assumed that the heat accumulated by
the World Ocean may play a crucial role in the temporal
delays of climate variations. The ocean largely affects
the atmosphere owing to the latter’s relatively small
heat capacity and therefore can hold back the temper
ature drop in the surface air by 15–18 years [26].
We have considered the role of a certain initial con
dition—the presence of optically dense cloudiness—
when solar flares and geomagnetic storms affect
weather–climate characteristics [27]. This is a wide
spread phenomenon in high and medium latitudes,
especially if we keep in mind that we are speaking
about densities only slightly exceeding one. The effect
of solar flares and geomagnetic storms on the weather
is strongly leveled down during such periods in a given
region since the genesis of a new thin cloudiness is
unnoticeable: the total heat radiation balance is
determined (for the ground air) by the optically thick
cloud cover. The distribution of this cover is often
largely related to the nature of the underlying surface
and orography, which is recorded well from space dur 1
ing visual instrumental observations. On the nightside,
the whole cloud cover, in fact, slows down the cooling
of the ground air layer. This is what probably leads to
still poorly understood [3] effects of global climate
change, such as the preemptive warming of winters
and the prevalence (twofold!) of the growth rates of
nightly (minimal) temperatures of the ground air over
daytime (maximal) temperatures.
The modern climate is surely affected by human
activity. The main cause of the growing climate insta
bility is the anthropogenic transformation of the
Green Earth into the Gray Earth due to the progress
Vol. 83
No. 3
2013

8. 282
AVAKYAN
%
−4
−8
−12
−16
−20
−24
1963
1976
1989
2002
Fig. 6. Average monthly values of cosmic ray variations at the station in Dolgoprudnyi (Moscow oblast) [http://cr0.izmi
ran.rssi.ru/mosc/main.htm].
The ordinate axis count starts with the cosmic ray intensity in the 1965 maximum (May June average), inferred for the zero.
ing abiotization of dry land [28]. The notion Gray
Earth means, among other things, that only half of the
forests remain (according to the UN Environmental
Program (UNEP), their area will decrease by another
17% by 2050); by the mid 1970s, human interference
reduced the dry land phytomass by 41.5%; by the
beginning of the 21st century, the critical point of 50%
has been passed; and there are forecasts that, in this
decade, less than two fifths of the natural phytomass
will be left on dry land. The Green Earth used to spend
almost 10% of the radiation balance on the biological
cycle on dry land, and now, it is 4%; that is, 6.3 W m–2
was released (to the external branch of the geological
cycle) outside of the biological cycle. This additional
heating of the utilized dry land with a thermal flux of
6.3 W m–2, which passes from the biocycle to the exter
nal branch of the geocycle, happens wherever abiotiza
tion has reduced the evaporation potential [28].
Indeed, more than 99% of the planetary phytomass
is concentrated on dry land. Heat fluxes and surface
temperatures grow owing to active degradation pro
cesses on territories under development, such as
expanding deforestation, desertification, urbaniza
tion, the laying of communications and roads, and
mining. According to contemporary concepts, the
most likely way of reducing carbon emission into the
atmosphere is depositing it in forest vegetation
through reforestation. The main part (up to 75%) of
carbon accumulated in living nature falls on forest
ecosystems [29], but we should note that carbon accu
mulation through photosynthesis is effective only in
relatively young boreal forests, since it takes 100 years
on average to occur.
In [28] attention is drawn to another discrepancy
between the observed features of contemporary warm
ing and the greenhouse hypothesis. Indeed, the main
greenhouse gas in the Earth’s atmosphere is water
vapors, but their content drops rapidly with height,
where temperature also drops sharply. As for the con
tent of all other tropospheric gases, including carbon
containing СО2 and СН4, it does not change owing to
the full stirring of the homosphere under the heights of
90 km. For some reason, the increase in the concen
tration of these anthropogenic components of the
greenhouse effect has not affected in any way the
warming of the middle and upper parts of the tropo
sphere without water vapors over the past decades.
Within the concept of the radiooptical mechanism,
the role of water vapors is clear; namely, water vapors
participate directly in cloud formation, controlled by
the factors of solar–geomagnetic activity through the
intensity of ionospheric microwave radiation. There
fore, experiments show an increase in cloud cover with
a parallel decrease in the content of water vapors in the
column of the middle and upper parts of the tropo
sphere and vice versa, i.e., in direct dependence on the
phase of growth or fall in solar activity.
Modern urbanization also influences the recorded
values of the effect of global warming. In the past three
decades, most weather stations of the world (up to 92%
according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration [26]) have found themselves in urban
development areas or close to them. This can add a
value to thermometer readings that exceeds 1°С,
which is higher than the total effect of global warming
observed (about 0.6°С). Moreover, urbanization leads
to a decrease in evaporation owing to water discharge
into the sewerage, and, for Moscow, this produces an
increment of 35 W m–2 in the warm season [26], which
is 21 times higher than the virtual greenhouse contri
bution of CO2 (1.65 W m–2). In general, urbanization
probably has a double effect on the content of water
vapors and always toward the temperature increase of
the ground air. First, there are no heat inputs for evap
oration in a big city (water is drained from asphalted
streets into the sewerage); second, heat and power
plants, automobiles, etc., produce water vapor during
fuel combustion, and the weight of this vapor exceeds
the mass of combusted fuel amplifying the greenhouse
effect, since water vapor exceeds carbon dioxide in its
greenhouse properties by two orders of magnitude.
HERALD OF THE RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES
Vol. 83
No. 3
2013

9. THE ROLE OF SOLAR ACTIVITY IN GLOBAL WARMING
The comparative quantitative analysis of the ener
getics of anthropogenic and natural factors of contem
porary climate change shows that the natural compo
nent (solar–geomagnetic activity) is more important
for its contribution to the radiation balance than the
greenhouse effect based on anthropogenic carbon
containing gases. Indeed, the value of the Earth’s heat
radiation flux outgoing to space has increased by
15 W m–2, which is almost six times larger than the
total net effect of greenhouse gases recorded by the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change over
many years (2.63 W m–2). The main point is that in
this case up to 7 W m–2 of additional outgoing long
wave radiation (OLR) is formed during the processing
into heat of an additional shortwave radiation that in
the amount of 10 W m–2 [25] started to penetrate into
the lower troposphere after the area of global cloudi
ness had decreased. This coefficient of transformation
of solar radiation incoming to the Earth (342 W m–2),
into the full OLR flux, which had already increased by
the beginning of this century from the late 1980s to
240 W m–2, was estimated by the ratio 240/342 = 0.7.
The contribution to global climate changes of the solar
constant variation (about 0.1%, i.e., 0.3 W m–2) is
obviously insignificant against the backdrop of both
solar–geomagnetic trends and the growing anthropo
genic effect.
POSSIBILITIES OF ACCOUNTING FOR SOLAR
ACTIVITY IN WEATHER–CLIMATE
FORECASTS
Now let us consider possibilities of accounting for
solar activity in forecasting weather–climate phenom
ena in the context of our concept of solar–tropo
spheric correlations. We already noted above the
quasi periodicity of 2–5.5 years in ground–air tem
peratures and precipitation, recorded by meteorolo
gists when studying the correlation with Wolf numbers.
Within the three step trigger mechanism, this result is
quite understandable: the increase of heating (opti
cally thin) cloudiness occurs thanks to the growing
flux of microwaves from the ionosphere both under the
effect of solar flares and during magnetic storms. On
the time scale (see Fig. 2), it takes about a year or less
to identify the dependence of the correlation in the
occurrence of total and lower cloudiness with solar
flare and sunspot activity: the middle curve is the
monthly averaged number of sunspots; the upper curve
is the current course of the solar constant value TSI;
and the lower curve and its linear trends are monthly
averaged satellite data about the total global cloud
cover. It is clear from Fig. 2 that at least intense peaks
in the number of sunspots are in anticorrelation with
overcast skies, and, in the TSI value (and consequently
in the value of the intensity of the ionizing flux of flare
fields of the Sun’s photosphere), they are in direct cor
HERALD OF THE RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES
283
relation. The revealed picture also corresponds fully to
the concept of the radiooptical mechanism effect on
overcast occurrence. Then we should state that we can
predict changes in the cloud cover area and, conse
quently, the Earth’s heat radiation balance with a lead
time of several months (proceeding from the known
statistics of these formations' lifetime in the Sun’s
photosphere) by the number of sunspots and flare
fields, as well as identify variations in the temperature
of the ground air and precipitation intensity in the
interval of the 2.5 to 5 year quasi periods by the dis
tribution statistics of large sun flares and global mag
netic storms. For the statistics of such events within
the 11 year cycle, we can assume that 2–4 years elapse
between the maxima of significant sun flares, but, for
geomagnetic storms, this period is longer, 2–6 years.
Note once again that the physics of the discussed
“solar signal” effect on the atmosphere is related to the
radiooptical three step trigger mechanism, when
microwave radiation, generated by the ionosphere
under the factors of amplified solar and geomagnetic
activity, regulates the condensation–cluster process of
the genesis and further evolution of the cloud cover,
including precipitation formation when “seeded” with
crystals from the upper layer clouds. However, the
main practical results of this work were obtained par
ticularly from the analysis of correlations between the
totality of ground based and satellite information on
weather–climatic characteristics, including cloud
occurrence and variations in the Earth’s balance, on
the one hand, and the factors of solar–geomagnetic
activity, on the other.
The authors of [30] believe that the global amount
of lower cloudiness is in phase opposition with TSI,
and the global distribution of overcast, on the contrary,
is in phase with TSI; in other words, it is genetically
related to the influence of the ionizing radiation of
solar flare fields. Therefore, we may conclude that the
middle and upper clouds (in their part that is close to
condensation haze and that is still optically thin)
weigh heavily upon the lower clouds in reaction to
increased solar–geomagnetic activity and, conse
quently, to increased ionization in the Earth’s iono
sphere with its subsequent generation of microwave
radiation. The optically thin cloudiness has maximal
potential to contribute both to the heating effect of the
atmospheric air (if the cloudiness is abundant as dur
ing the maximal solar–geomagnetic activity) and to
the phenomenon of passage (exit) of the Earth’s heat
radiation to space (during the decrease in the area of
optically thin clouds in the recent epoch of recession
in solar activity in the secular cycle).
We stress that the influence of heliogeophysical
activity and ionospheric disturbance on weather–cli
matic characteristics is an interdisciplinary problem,
and meteorologists, even together with geographers,
are unable to solve it. Here is an example of a wide
Vol. 83
No. 3
2013

10. 284
AVAKYAN
spread mistake. Many meteorological and geographi
cal publications about the nature of global climatic
variations consider the known astronomical effects
(for instance, orbital variations and the trend of the
Earth’s rotation speed, as well as changes in the solar
system’s position in the Galaxy). Note that astronom
ical (orbital) effects can really be interesting in terms
of the Earth’s climate on a long period scale (from 103
to 106 years). For shorter periods, the Earth’s position
relative to other planets, including the giant planets of
Jupiter and Saturn, is taken into account. However, for
the above gravitational solar–planetary effects, there is
the hypothesis of the resonance structure of the solar
system [31], which is most evident in the variability of
solar activity (the number of powerful flares). It fol
lows from this hypothesis that a nonlinear oscillating
system, like the Sun and its planets during their suffi
ciently long dynamic evolution, tries to reach a syn
chronous regime in which the frequencies of individ
ual processes (for example, solar flare activity or
changes in various parameters of the planetary system)
are in simple multiple relations among themselves. For
example, the influence of the periodic movement of the
planets on solar flares, which seems insignificant owing
to the small energy of gravitational interaction between
the planetary system and the Sun compared to the ener
getics of solar activity, has a deep physical cause. Reso
nant vectors in the solar system, defined in [31], corre
spond to those identified by statistical processing of
perennial data on the distribution of solar flares in a year
by the number of recorded solar cosmic rays in more
than 1000 cases [32]. We may state that the positions of
giant planets manifest themselves in the statistical tem
poral distribution of moments of increased solar activ
ity, and there is no need to look for ways of individual
accounting for these astronomical effects.
We should stress that the development of the phys
ical mechanism of influence of solar and geomagnetic
activity factors on weather–climatic characteristics
may become a clue to the methods of human control
of weather and climate.
The results given in this article contradict the fash
ion of exaggerating the role of human interference in
nature within short—several decades—periods. Let
us recall the “ozone problem”: in the 1970s the cause
of a hole in the stratospheric ozone layer over Antarc
tic was linked to Freon discharges. In reality, the ratio
between the contribution of Freon and natural chan
nels of ozone destruction has not been fully measured
for the simple reason that the Montreal agreements
limiting Freon production and use were implemented
by the world community before the first direct mea
surements of concentrations of chlorine compounds
in the stratosphere at the heights of the ozone maxi
mum. At the same time, the Soviet cosmonauts them
selves saw high, stratospheric clouds right in the area
of Antarctic in 1978 [33]. Heterogeneous reactions
(on the surface of ice particles of these clouds) lead to
the acceleration of reactions that kill ozone molecules
by several orders of magnitude. The increase in the
polar stratospheric cloud cover in the late 1970s and
the first half of the 1980s agrees well with the analytical
results in this article concerning that satellite informa
tion on global cloud distribution that has been received
in state of the art space experiments since 1983.
Thus, in 1985–1987, during the latest secular maxi
mum of solar electromagnetic–corpuscular activity,
the most significant occurrence of clouds of all types
was observable over the globe. Within our concept of
the influence of the main factors of solar–geomag
netic activity on cloud formation processes, this is
linked right to the passage through the total secular
maximum of clearly manifested quasi centenary and
quasi bicentenary cycles of solar activity. It is hard to
assume that the latest secular maximum in solar activ
ity, which fell on the period when the ozone hole was
recorded, did not affect the genesis of stratospheric
polar clouds. So, the analysis of the situation with the
physical causes of another, climatic, “problem of the
century” allows the scientific community to focus on
the need for an all round study of primarily natural
causes of global changes in the environment.
The decision of the Russian Security Council to
establish the interdepartmental Climate Research
Center in St. Petersburg appears to be important. In
early 2011, the Commission for the Physical Problems
of Recent Climate Change started to work at the
Research Council on Ecology and Natural Resources
under the RAS Research Center in St. Petersburg and
prepared a composite package of proposals for the
National Climate Program. Taking into account the
great scientific potential of St. Petersburg, including
the entities of the Federal Service for Hydrometeorol
ogy and Environmental Monitoring (Rosgidromet)
and academic research institutes, such as the Chief
(Pulkovo) Astronomical Observatory, the Physicote
chnical Institute, and the branch of the Institute of
Terrestrial Magnetism, the Ionosphere, and Radio
Wave Propagation, we may expect to produce scien
tific rationales for intergovernmental agreements,
including Russia’s participation in the Kyoto Proto
col, which was suspended in 2012.
REFERENCES
1. Proc. First All Union Conference “Solar–Atmospheric
Correlations in Climate Theory and Weather Forecasts”
(Gidrometeoizdat, Leningrad, 1974) [in Russian].
2. S. V. Avakyan, “Optics in the global changes of environ
ment,” Armen. J. Phys. 2 (1) (2009).
3. K. Ya. Kondrat’ev and L. S. Ivlev, Climatology of Aero
sols and Cloudiness (VVM, St. Petersburg, 2008) [in
Russian].
4. V. L. Krauklis, G. A. Nikol’skii, M. M. Safronova, and
E. O. Shul’ts, “On the conditions under which the
HERALD OF THE RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES
Vol. 83
No. 3
2013

11. THE ROLE OF SOLAR ACTIVITY IN GLOBAL WARMING
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
anomalous extinction of the UV radiation by aerosol
can occur in clear atmosphere,” Opt. Atmos. 3 (3), 227
(1990).
G. A. Nikol’skii and E. O. Shul’ts, “Spectral and tem
poral variations of the residual extinction in the near
UV Region,” Opt. Atmos. 4 (9), 961 (1991).
V. S. Troitskii, A. M. Starodubtsev, L. N. Bondar’, et al.,
“Search for sporadic radio emission from space at cen
timeter and decimeter wavelengths,” Izv. Vyssh.
Uchebn. Zaved., Radiofiz. 16 (3) (1973).
S. V. Avakyan, A. E. Serova, and, N. A. Voronin “The
role of Rydberg atoms and molecules in the upper
atmosphere,” Geomagn. Aeron. 37 (3), 331 (1997).
S. M. Grach, V. M. Fridman, L. M. Lifshits, et al.,
“Decimeter electromagnetic radiation stimulated by
shortwave heating of the atmosphere,” in Proc. XX All
Russia Conference on Radio Wave Propagation, (Nizhni
Novgorod, 2002) [in Russian].
S. V. Avakyan and N. A. Voronin, “Possible mecha
nisms for the influence of heliogeophysical activity on
the biosphere and the weather,” J. Opt. Technol. 73 (4),
281 (2006).
V. I. Vernadsky, Scientific Thought As a Planetary Phe
nomenon (Nauka, Moscow, 1991) [in Russian].
D. R. Bates, “Electron–ion recombination in an ambi
ent molecular gas,” J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Phys. 14 (18),
3525 (1981).
A. A. Dmitriev and T. Yu. Lomakina, “Cloud cover and
space X ray radiation,” in Solar Activity Effects in the
Lower Atmosphere (Gidrometeoizdat, Leningrad, 1977)
[in Russian].
K. Ya. Kondrat’ev and V. I. Binenko, “Cirrus clouds,
radiation, and climate,” in Science and Technology
Results, Ser. Meteorology and Climatology (VINITI,
Moscow, 1988), Vol. 18 [in Russian].
E. P. Borisenkov, T. A. Bazlova, and L. N. Efimova, Cir
rus Cover and Its Influence on Atmospheric Processes
(Gidrometeoizdat, Leningrad, 1989) [in Russian].
V. N. Kolesnikova and A. S. Monin, “Spectra of
micrometeorological, synoptic, and climatic oscilla
tions of meteorological fields,” in Meteorological
Research, General Circulation of the Earth’s Atmosphere
(Nauka, Moscow, 1968), Vol. 16, pp. 30–57 [in Rus
sian].
S. V. Avakyan and N. A. Voronin, “On the radiooptical
and optical mechanisms of influence of cosmic factors
on the global warming,” J. Opt. Technol. 77 (2), 141
(2010).
R. E. Benestad, Solar Activity and Earth’s Climate
(Springer Praxis, 2002).
V. A. Rumyantsev and Yu. A. Trapeznikov, “Grounding
of forming mechanism for short term climatic cycles of
hydrometeorological processes,” Izv. Russ. Geogr.
Obshch. 144 (3), 9 (2012).
S. V. Avakyan and N. A. Voronin, “The role of space
and ionospheric disturbances in the global climate
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
change and pipeline corrosion,” Izv., Atm. Oceanic
Phys. 47 (9), 1143 (2011).
M. Lockwood and C. Frohlich, “Recent oppositely
directed trends in solar climate forcings and the global
mean surface air temperature,” in Proc. R. Soc. Lon
don, Ser. A (2007). doi 10.1098/r5sspa.2007.1880
J. Lean, “Living with a variable sun,” Phys. Today,
No. 6, 35 (2005).
A. Belov, H. Garcia, V. Kurt, and E. Mavromichalaki,
“Proton events and X ray flares in the last three solar
cycles,” Cosm. Res. 43 (3), 165 (2005).
V. N. Aref’ev, F. V. Kashin, V. K. Semenov, et al., “Water
vapor in the atmosphere over the northern Tien Shan,”
Izv. Atm. Oceanic Phys. 42 (6), 739 (2006).
P. R. Good and E. Palle, “Shortwave forcing of the
Earth’s climate: Modern and historical variations in the
sun’s irradiance and the Earth’s reflectance,” J. Atm.
Sol. Terr. Phys. 69 (13), 1556 (2007).
V. A. Golovko, “Global redistribution of components
of the Earth’s radiation balance,” Issled. Zemli Kos
mosa, No. 5 (2003).
O. M. Pokrovskii, “Climate: Myths and reality,” Gos.
Upravlenie Resursami, No. 1(55) (2010).
S. V. Avakyan, “Channels of cosmophysical factors
influence on the weather and climate characteristics,”
in Proc. All Russia Annual Conference on Solar Physics
“Solar and Solar–Terrestrial Physics 2010.” October 3–
9, 2010 (GAO, St. Petersburg, 2010) [in Russian].
S. P. Gorshkov, “Causes of global warming and
increased climate instability: Possible countermeasures
off the Kyoto Protocol,” in Sustainable Development:
Problems and Prospects, Vol. 4: Rational Nature Man
agement: International Programs, Russian and Foreign
Practices (KMK, Moscow, 2010) [in Russian].
N. B. Leonova and G. N. Ogureeva, “Forest vegetation
of the temperate zone under global environmental
changes,” in Recent Global Changes in the Natural Envi
ronment (Nauchnyi Mir, Moscow, 2006), Vol. 2 [in Rus
sian].
J. E. Kristjansson, J. Kristiansen, and E. Kaas, “Solar
activity, cosmic rays, clouds, and climate—an update,”
Adv. in Space Res. 34, 407 (2004). doi
10.1016/j.asr.2003.02.040
A. M. Molchanov, “Resonanses in multifrequency
oscillations,” Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 168 (2), 284
(1966).
V. P. Kozelov and G. I. Mingaleva, “Anisotropy of solar
flare activity in the inertial space and the resonance
ability of the solar system,” in Substorms and Excita
tions in the Magnetosphere (Nauka, Leningrad, 1975),
pp. 264–274 [in Russian].
A. I. Lazarev, V. V. Kovalenok, and S. V. Avakyan, Stud
ies of the Earth from Piloted Spaceships (Gidrometeoiz
dat, Leningrad, 1987) [in Russian].
Translated by B. Alekseev
SPELL: 1. orography
HERALD OF THE RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES
285
Vol. 83
No. 3
2013