Peer-reviewed Research Contradicts the IPCC

"And yet it moves."

― Galileo Galilei

 

It is clear he has no counter argument to offer........., article remains unchallenged.

 

The paper cited in post #1 must have struck a nerve because it has been the target of falsehoods and fake news attacks.
False and misleading “fact check” about Connolly, et al., 2021
Andy May
By Andy May -- Dr. Ronan Connolly and his co-authors respond to obvious false claims, in a supposed “fact check” about their latest paper on how solar variability may be affecting…

 

This could develop into a real throw-down.
Willie Soon Explains About the Sun, and How to Better Report Science
September 11, 2021 By jennifer 4 Comments


Temperatures are always changing, and the pattern of change tends to follow cycles. But most science reporters don't understand this, because they have very little understanding of the solar system and are promoted within their organisations based on … [Read more...]

". . . A recent paper with many authors, including my friend and colleague Willie Soon, explains in detail that the institutions (most notably the IPCC) are mistaken in their assessment of the importance of carbon dioxide relative to the Sun, at least in part because in making their calculations they fail to adequately consider all the relevant measures of solar irradiance and are somewhat muddled when it comes to actual temperature trends for specific locations. (Of course, the Australian Bureau of Meteorology deliberately muddles temperature trends by remodelling the raw data.)

The paper by Willie and colleagues is rather long, 71 pages in the pre-print that I have. It is long because it goes into detail, explaining the potential complexity of solar irradiance including the sixteen different ways of measuring changes in ‘total solar variability’ since the 19th century and earlier, and even how the sun-climate effect is more pronounced at certain places on Earth.

The paper was recently published in the journal Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics Volume 21, beginning on page 131, and can be downloaded by clicking here:
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1674-4527/21/6/131. . . . "

 

Broader research will be required for the IPCC to regain scientific credibility.
Diffuse sunlight and cosmic rays: Missing pieces of the forest growth change attribution puzzle?
Bontemps, J-D. & Svensmark, H., 2022, In: Science of the Total Environment. 806, 6 p., 150469.
Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › peer-review

 

Resistance is spreading.
"The Climate Is Changing, And Human Activities Are The Cause": How, Exactly, Do We Know That?
October 28, 2021/ Francis Menton

• 
  “The climate is changing, and we are the cause.” That is a statement that is so often-repeated and affirmed that it goes way beyond mere conventional wisdom. Probably, you encounter some version or another of that statement multiple times per week; maybe dozens of times. Everybody knows that it is true!
  
  
• And to express disagreement with that statement, probably more so than with any other element of current progressive orthodoxy, is a sure way to get yourself labeled a “science denier,” fired from an academic job, or even banished from the internet.
  
  
• The UN IPCC’s recent Sixth Assessment Report on the climate is chock full of one version after another of the iconic statement, in each instance of course emphasizing that the human-caused climate changes are deleterious and even catastrophic.
  

• Over and over, it’s that we have “high confidence” that human influence is the cause, or that events would have been “extremely unlikely” without human influence.
  
  
• But how, really, do we know that? What is the proof?
  

READ MORE

 

This is how the IPCC gets it wrong.
Suboptimal Fingerprinting? A debate about climate statistics

Ross McKitrick explains in layman’s terms the statistical errors he has found in the “optimal fingerprinting” methodology, widely used to attribute weather events to human influence.

 

Dissent is spreading.

Solar variations controversy
Posted on November 21, 2021 by curryja | 82 comments
by Judith Curry



“The field of Sun-climate relations . . . in recent years has been corrupted by unwelcome political and financial influence as climate change sceptics have seized upon putative solar effects as an excuse for inaction on anthropogenic warming” – Lockwood (2012)

“We argue that the Sun/climate debate is one of these issues where the IPCC’s “consensus” statements were prematurely achieved through the suppression of dissenting scientific opinions.” – Connolly et al. (2021)

Continue reading →