I've read about your quest for the alternative explanation for global warming here.
<http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national/story.html?id=3d885041-2faf-4806-bca8-d8f27e2f38de&k=75278 >
About:
"Veizer theorized that there might be something, directly linked to solar radiation, that amplifies the sun's effect."
Exactly, I think that you are fully correct and that missing link is albedo variation. The Pallé et al (2006) study holds the key, but the researcher appeared to be completely unaware of that.
http://www.bbso.njit.edu/~epb/reprints/Palle_etal_EOS_2006.pdf
"Can Earth's Albedo and Surface Temperatures Increase Together?"
But that's not happening. Since the temperatures are stagnating after 1998 together with the albedo. When I saw fig 2 for the first time I estimated the r2 of the global temperatures (GISS) and albedo variation to be at least 50% and I was right: 57,5%.
http://home.wanadoo.nl/bijkerk/albedo-temp.GIF
and
http://home.wanadoo.nl/bijkerk/albedo2.GIF
Now if you apply Stefan Boltzman on the 10% albedo variation this would give a blackbody temperature variation of some 2.75 K but in reality it is only 0,5 degrees, which suggests that the oceans provided a strong negative feedback by adsorption of the insolation and getting warming up in the process. Of course IR re-radiation caused by greenhouse gas effect cannot penetrate water and could not have caused the ocean heating.
So with this albedo variation the sequence appears to be the old hypothesis: Increase of Solar magnetic induced field -> deflection of particles towards the poles -> less condensation nuclei -> Less clouds, lower albedo -> more insolation -> global warming.
That should settle the science, I would think.
