A group of experts from around the world concluded that it was premature to blame climate change mainly on greenhouse gas emissions. Their findings contradict the UN IPCC conclusion, which the study showed is based on narrow and incomplete data on total solar radiation (TSI).
A new scientific review has just been published on the Sun's role in climate change over the past 150 years.
It says that the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) prematurely concluded that recent climate changes are mainly caused by anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions.
The work of 23 experts in solar physics and climatology from 14 different countries is published in the peer-reviewed journal Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics (RAA).
V article, which is the most comprehensive to date, analyzed 16 of the best known published solar activity datasets, including those used by the IPCC.
The researchers compared them to 26 different estimates of temperature trends in the Northern Hemisphere since the 19th century (sorted into five categories), including the datasets used by the IPCC.
They focused on the Northern Hemisphere because the available data for the early 20th century and earlier for the Southern Hemisphere are much more limited, but their results can be generalized to global temperatures.
How strongly does the Sun influence temperature trends in the Northern Hemisphere?
The study found that scientists are reaching opposite conclusions about the causes of recent climate change, depending on which datasets they look at.
For example, in the graphs above, the graphs on the left lead to the conclusion that global temperature changes since the mid-19th century are mainly caused by anthropogenic emissions, especially carbon dioxide (CO2), i.e. to the conclusion made in the UN IPCC reports.
On the contrary, in the graphs to the right, one can draw the exact opposite conclusion, namely, that global temperature changes since the mid-19th century are mainly due to natural cycles, mainly long-term changes in the energy emitted by the Sun.
Both sets of tables are based on published scientific data, but each uses a different set of data and assumptions.
On the left, it is assumed that the available temperature records are not affected by the urban heat island problem, therefore all stations, both urban and rural, are used.
On the right, only the village stations are used.
Meanwhile, on the left, solar activity is modeled using the low variability dataset that was selected for the upcoming (in 2021/2022) 6th IPCC Assessment Report. This implies zero contribution of natural factors to long-term warming.
On the right, solar activity is modeled with a high-variability dataset used by the team in charge of NASA's ACRIM satellites to monitor the Sun. This means that most, if not all, long-term changes in temperature are due to natural factors.
Dr. Ronan Connolly, lead author of the study, from the Center for Environmental Research and Geosciences (CERES):
"The IPCC is mandated to find consensus on the causes of climate change.I understand the political benefit of consensus that it makes the job of politicians easier. However, science does not work by consensus. In fact, science thrives best when scientists are allowed to disagree with each other and investigate various causes of disagreement. I fear that by actually looking at only those datasets and studies that support their chosen version, the IPCC is seriously hampering scientific progress in truly understanding the causes of recent and future climate change. I am particularly concerned about their inability to satisfactorily explain temperature trends in rural areas."
The 72-page study (18 figures, 2 tables, and 544 references) clearly avoids the IPCC consensus approach, as the authors agreed to highlight where scientific dissenting opinions exist and where scientific consensus exists.
Indeed, each of the co-authors has different scientific opinions on many of the issues discussed, but they agreed in this paper to honestly present the competing arguments of the scientific community on each of these issues and give the reader the opportunity to form their own opinion.
Several coauthors shared how this process of objectively examining the pros and cons of competing scientific arguments for an article gave them fresh ideas for their own future research. The authors also suggested that the IPCC reports would have greater scientific credibility if the IPCC adopted this non-consensus approach.
Victor Manuel Velasco Herrera, professor of theoretical physics and geophysics at the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM), said:
"This work is special as all 23 coauthors have abandoned their scientific fields and specialties to provide an honest and balanced scientific review of the relationship between the sun and climate, which was largely overlooked or simply ignored in the UN IPCC reports."
Nicola Scafetta, Professor of Oceanography and Atmospheric Physics at the University of Naples Federico II (Italy):
"The possible contribution of the sun to global warming in the 20th century is highly dependent on the specific solar and climatic records that are accepted for analysis. This issue is extremely important since the current IPCC statement about the insignificant influence of the sun on post-industrial climate warming is based only on predictions of global circulation models. which are compared to climate records that are likely to be affected by non-climatic warming errors (such as those associated with urbanization), and which are produced using solar forcing functions derived from total solar irradiance records that represent the least secular variability (ignoring studies solar activity, indicating much greater solar variability, which also shows a different modulation, better correlated with climatic) The consequence of this approach is that the natural component of climate change is minimized, and anthropoge data - is maximized. The RAA study will be useful and timely for both solar scientists and climatologists as it illuminates and addresses this very issue."
Ole Humlum, Professor Emeritus of Physical Geography, University of Oslo, Norway:
"This study clearly demonstrates the importance of scrutinizing all aspects of all available data. It is clear that the old adage 'Nullius in verba' is still very relevant in modern climate research."
Gregory Henry, Senior Research Fellow in Astronomy at the Center of Excellence in Information Systems, University of Tennessee (USA):
“Over the past three decades, I have carried out high-precision measurements of the brightness changes of more than 300 stars similar to the Sun using a fleet of robotic telescopes developed for this purpose. The data obtained shows that as sun-like stars age, their rotation slows down, which means their magnetic activity decreases. and brightness variability. Stars similar in age and mass to our Sun exhibit brightness variations comparable to those of the Sun and are expected to influence climate change in their planetary systems."
Valery Mikhailovich Fedorov, Faculty of Geography, Moscow State University M.V. Lomonosov, Russia:
"The study of global climate change is in dire need of an analytical review of scientific research on solar variations associated with the Earth's orbital motion, which could help determine the role and contribution of solar variations of different physical natures to long-term climate change. This work is directing scientific priority on the right track." …
Richard K. Willson, Principal Investigator in charge of NASA's ACRIM series of satellite experiments to monitor total solar radiation from the Sun (USA):
“Contrary to the conclusions of the IPCC, scientific observations of recent decades have shown that there is no 'climate change crisis'. The concept, which has become an untenable hypothesis of anthropogenic global warming CO2 (CAGW), is based on erroneous predictions of inaccurate models of global circulation of the 1980s, which are not correspond to observational data both after and before their creation.
The Earth's climate is determined primarily by the radiation it receives from the Sun. The amount of solar radiation received by the Earth has natural fluctuations, caused both by variations in the intrinsic amount of radiation emitted by the Sun and variations in the Earth-Sun geometry caused by planetary rotational and orbital variations. Together, these natural variations cause cyclical changes in total solar irradiance (TSI) on Earth at a number of known periodicities that are synchronized with known climatic changes in the past."
Weijia Zhang, Professor of Physics at Shaoxing University (China) and Fellow of the Royal Astronomical Society (UK):
“The quest to understand how the Earth's climate is related to the Sun is one of the oldest scientific subjects studied by the ancient Greeks and Chinese. This overview article opens the mystery and explains why it has been so difficult to achieve scientific success so far. It will take a real understanding of dynamics fluids and magnetism on both the Sun and Earth to find the next big leap forward."
Hong Yan (晏 宏), Professor of Geology and Paleoclimatology at the Institute of the Earth's Environment and Deputy Director of the State Key Laboratory of Loess and Quaternary Geology in Xi'an, China:
“Paleoclimatic data have long informed us of the large natural variations in local, regional and hemispheric climates on decadal, multidecadal and centennial timescales. with different wavelengths ".
Ana G. Elias, Director of the Laboratory of the Ionosphere, Atmospheric Neutra and Magnetosphere (LIANM), Faculty of Science and Technology, National University of Tucuman (FACET-UNT), Argentina:
“The importance of this work is that it presents a broader perspective, showing that it is necessary to take into account all relevant long-term trend factors of climate variability, and not just anthropogenic (as has been done in general).How the role of these factors is assessed, for example, in the case of solar and geomagnetic activity, is also important, without underestimating either of them in pursuit of the other. Even the earth's magnetic field can play a role in the climate."
Willie Sun, Fellow at the Center for Environmental Research and Earth Sciences (CERES), who has also been studying the relationship between the sun and climate at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics (USA) since 1991:
“We know that the Sun is the main source of energy for the Earth's atmosphere. Therefore, it has always been an obvious potential contributor to recent climate change. My own research over the past 31 years on the behavior of stars similar to our Sun shows that solar variability is the norm. For this reason, the Sun's role in recent climate change should never have been undermined as systematically as the IPCC reports have done. It is hoped that this systematic review of the many unresolved and ongoing problems and complexities in the Sun-climate relationship will help the scientific community return towards a more comprehensive and realistic approach to understanding climate change."
Laszlo Sharka, employee of the Institute of Physics of the Earth and Space Sciences ELKH (Hungary), as well as a member of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences:
"This review is a major milestone on the road to re-establishing the scientific definition of 'climate change' that has been gradually distorted over the past three decades. The scientific community must finally realize that there is no authority or consensus in science; there is only the right to seek the truth."