SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Gine Roll Skjaervoe at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology's (NTNU) ( http://www.ntnu.edu ) Department of Biology has studied church records from the period 1750-1900 and looked at life history variables: how old were women when they had their first child, and their last? How many years passed between the birth of each child, and how many of these children survived? How many of these children were in turn married and had children?
On average, the lifespan of children born in years that had a great deal of solar activity was 5.2 years shorter than other children. The largest difference was in the probability of dying during the first two years of life.
Children who were born in years with lots of sunshine and who survived were also more likely to have fewer children, who in turn gave birth to fewer children than others. This finding shows that increased UV radiation during years of high solar activity had an effect across generations.
Skjaervoe used information on the number of sunspots as an indication of the amount of UV radiation in a given year. The number of sunspots reaches a maximum every 11 years on average, which results in more UV radiation on Earth during years with high sunspot and solar activity.
UV radiation can have positive effects on human vitamin D levels, but it can also result in a reduction of vitamin B9 (folate). It is known that low folate levels during pregnancy are linked to higher child mortality.
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2015-01/nuos-msm010915.php
Also covered by: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/01/150109045540.htm
[Paper]: http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/282/1801/20142032
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by jmorris on Sunday January 11 2015, @04:01PM
There might be a statistical connection but it almost certainly isn't anything obvious. Total irradiation doesn't actually change during the solar cycle unless you have very sensitive instruments to detect the slight change. The Warmists are right on that point. Some of the UV does vary a bit more but again, we are talking about infant mortality here, even in olden times infants didn't exactly live outdoors.
So that leaves the more subtle solar cycle influenced things some of us Deniers (i.e. science) have been looking to for some mechanism to tie the solar cycle to global climate cycles to explain things like the 'little ice age' that the Warmists tried to edit out of the historical record because it didn't fit their faith. The bottom line is that if the solar cycle actually is (this one study certainly ain't going to convince me) having an impact great enough to be visible in human birth/death rates then there is SOME mechanism that is going to be big enough to impact global climate.