The IPCC’s model as well as the computer based GCMs (General Circulation Models) have encountered troubles due to the 18 year pause in global warming, Fig. 1. The IPCC’s latest model value is about 35 % greater than the observed temperature (1.15 C versus 0.85 C). According to IPCC, factors other than the anthropogenic drivers increase temperature less than 3 %. Because the error is so large, the dependency of the surface temperature based solely on the GH gas concentrations is no longer justified.
There are two cosmic forces, which are capable of affecting the Earth’s climate. The solar radiation corresponds more than 99.9 % of the heat energy on the Earth. Therefore even small fluctuations in the solar irradiance have global temperature effects. The direct irradiation changes are amplified by cosmic rays and cloudiness changes. Fig. 1 illustrates the correlation between the Sun activity changes connected with cosmic rays and the global temperature.
Figure 1: Correaltion between the Sun acitivity changes and the global temperature.
Fig. 2 illustrates the temperature reconstruction during the last 2000 years as composed by Ljungqvist. Because the man made GH gases cannot be the direct cause, the main reasons are the cosmic forces such as the Sun’s activity changes.
Figure 2: Temperature reconstruction by Lungqvist.
There is another cosmic model, commonly unknown, called an Astronomical Harmonic Climate Model (AHCM). The Russian scientists Ermakov, Okhlopkov and Stozhkov firstly have introduced an idea that the planets of our solar system have an influence on our climate. Furtherly they increasingly developed this theory and its effects on cloudiness, albedo, and climate. This same approach has been also proposed by Scafetta. The AHCM assumes that the climate resonates, or synchronizes with a set of natural harmonics that are associated mostly with the planetary motions of Jupiter and Saturn. If somebody doubts that these planets have no effects on our planet, please read a fresh study, which shows that Jupiter and Saturn keeps the orbit of the Earth almost in the form of circle, which make the Earth habitable: International Journal of Astrobiology, DOI: 10.1017/S1473550414000469.
Jupiter and Saturn have the opposition cycle of 10-10.5 years, the synodic cycle of 20-21 years (the planets align in their orbits, when looking from the Sun), and the repetition of the combined orbits of 60-62 years. Ermakov et al. have proposed a mechanism, which could cause the actual climate effects of the AHCM theory. The amount of dust entering daily into the Earth’s atmosphere varies from 400 to 10 000 tons. The Earth passes annually through a dust cloud situated between the Sun and Mars. Variations in dust amounts happen during a longer time scale depending on the periodicities of the planets, which can move the dust cloud position. In the same way that galactic cosmic rays (GCR) cause ionization in the atmosphere, dust particles can cause the same phenomenon. In this respect, the cosmic ray model and the cosmic dust model have a common meeting point, but the original reasons are different: the Sun activity changes and planetary periodical motions as illustrated in Fig. 3.
Figure 3. Schematic flow chart of the AHCM and the Sun model.
I have created three models based on the combinations of AHCM, the Sun model, and the effects of greenhouse (GH) gases. I show two combinations in Fig. 4 and Fig 5.
Figure 4: The estimated temperature based on SDI (=Space Dust Index), Sun Irradiance (TSI) and the impacts of GH gases together with the Earth’s temperature. The black curve is the combined effect of SDI, the Sun and GH gases. For reference is depicted the warming impacts of IPCC’s CO2-model and GH gas impacts by Ollila.
The presentation depicted in Fig. 4 includes the warming impacts of GH gases as calculated according to earlier studies by Ollila. Even by eye it is easy to see that this combined model follows the observed Earth’s temperature very accurately and the correlation r2 = 0.971. Generally an r2 value of greater than 0.95 is a sufficient explanation about the real correlation between two phenomena.
Figure 5: The estimated temperature based on SDI and Sun Irradiance together with the Earth’s temperature. The black curve is the combined effect of SDI and TSI. For reference also is depicted the warming impacts of IPCC’s CO2-model.
The presentation in Fig. 5 does not include any warming impacts of GH gases. In this model the impacts of GH gases are completely eliminated as explained by Miskolczi that the Earth has a constant GH effect, where the humidity changes compensate the increased warming effects of GH gases. The correlation of this combination is also very good, because r2 = 0.948.
As one can see in these graphical presentations, there is a common feature that both models can explain exceptionally well the historical temperature variations due to the AHCM impacts. The SDI model (AHCM) explains almost perfectly the temperature peak from 1930 to 1950. The SDI model also offers a good explanation for the temperature pause starting in 2000 that is still ongoing. The AGW (Anthropogenic Global Warming) model cannot explain these two phenomena, as it depends on the monotonically increasing concentrations of GH gases.
The major difference is in the future temperature projections. In the years from 2020 to 2030 the model including GH gas effects gives the temperature level, which is about 0.2-0.25 °C higher than that of the model including only cosmic effects.
The Sun activity has decreased quite strongly during the latest solar cycle and is now at the same level as during the period 1903-1915. The SDI shows also a large decrease from the year 2015 forward. A fresh study of Shepherd, Zharkov and Zharkova proposes quite a deep decrease during the next two solar cycles, Fig. 6. This model is interesting because it can explain the future solar cycles based on the theoretical analysis of the Sun’s nuclear power system. If these cosmic models are correct, the temperature should start to decrease during the next five years.
Figure 6: The history and the forecast solar cycles according to Shepherd, Zharkov and Zharkova S. J. Shepherd, S. I. Zharkov and V. Zharkova, “Prediction of Solar Activity from Solar Background Magnetic Field Variations in Cycles 21-23,” The Astrophysical Journal, vol. 795, p. 46, DOI:10.1088/0004-637X/795/1/46
The third option is that the temperature pause will continue essentially at the present level. Also in this case the AGW theory will lose its credibility, because the gap between the model and the reality grows too large. The cosmic model and the impacts according to the revised warming impact of CO2 and the CS parameter of 0.27 K/(Wm-2) proposed by Ollila would be close enough to offer a scientific explanation.
It is quite easy to forecast that the period 2015-2020 might be decisive concerning the evidence of the two major approaches: the AGW model of IPCC and the cosmic model variations represented in this paper. If the temperature starts to increase and to approach the calculated IPCC’s model values, it would support the impacts of anthropogenic reasons. If the temperature starts to decrease, it is evidence that the warming impacts of GH gases are overestimated by IPCC, and the cosmic force changes have a major impact on the Earth’s temperature.
The original paper: http://www.scienpress.com/journal_focus.asp?main_id=59&Sub_id=IV&Issue=1564