Did you see some if the other peoples slides..
Utter academic PowerPoint Eco speak, Richard seems to be the only person that can speak normally

He misses some point about sceptic being sceptical of the media, environmental. Political version of climates science. And of climates policies

Dung

Are you are pulling my leg? I hope so, because the alternative is that you are out of your depth. You say:

It seems unlikely that accurate records of cosmic rays existed at the time?

And in your very next comment (bold added):

deals with a similar time period; 1880 - 1990 and shows a close correlation between sunspot activity and temperature. Cosmic ray intensity closely tracks sunspot activity.

So - you use observations of sunspot numbers (Wolf number/Group Sunspot Number) and the Beryllium-10 and C14 cosmogenic isotope count in tree rings and ice cores to infer GCR flux.

If you are going to argue the toss about GCRs and climate, you should know this stuff. The fact that you obviously don't suggests that the 'scepticism' is rather ahead of topic knowledge. And that's never a good thing.

Another bad thing is using an obsolete study from 1991 to support an incorrect claim. What makes it worse still is that Lassen himself has modified his own original conclusions in the light of newer data:

From Lassen (1991) (your reference above):

The varying length of the 11-year cycle has been found to be strongly correlated with longterm variations of the northern hemisphere land surface air temperature since the beginning of systematic temperature variations from a global network, i. e. during the past 130 years. Although direct temperature observations before this interval are scarce, it has been possible to extend the correlation back to the 16th century due to the existence of a series of proxy temperature data published by Groveman and Landsberg in 1979. Reliable sunspot data do not exist before 1750, but we have been able to derive epochs of minimum sunspot activity from auroral observations back to 1500 and combine them with the direct observations to a homogeneous series.

From Thejll & Lassen (1999):

It has previously been demonstrated that the mean land air temperature of the Northern hemisphere could adequately be associated with a long-term variation of solar activity as given by the length of the approximately 11-year solar cycle. Adding new temperature data for the 1990’s and expected values for the next sunspot extrema we test whether the solar cycle length model is still adequate. We find that the residuals are now inconsistent with the pure solar model. We conclude that since around 1990 the type of Solar forcing that is described by the solar cycle length model no longer dominates the long-term variation of the Northern hemisphere land air temperature.

In future, would you mind linking to a .pdf of papers you reference? Or at the very least an abstract. It is a courtesy and saves my time. Thanks.

Link failure:

Thejll & Lassen (1999)