A new post at the Norwegian GeoForskning (Geological Research) site by Jan-Erik Solheim and Ole Humlum is quite significant I think. Solheim is Professor (emeritus) at Institutt for teoretisk astrofysikk, University of Oslo while Humlum is professor of Physical Geography at the University of Oslo and an adjunct Professor at UNIS (University Centre in Svalbard). The post shows that a simple harmonic model (movements of the sun, moon and planets together with linear trends) provides a better fit to the global temperature data since 1850 and likely a better predictor than the assembly of 44 climate models used by the IPCC. They find no signal since the 1950’s which could correspond to any significant impact of carbon dioxide concentration and find no need to include such an influence. If such an effect is present its influence is miniscule.
Models need to be parsimonius to exclude parameters and mechanisms whose effects cannot be discerned. Otherwise they cannot be anchored in reality. A problem with many of the so-called climate models is that they include hypothetical effects which cannot be discerned in the available data, then apply forcing feedbacks to such hypothetical effects and then conclude that the results are valid!
If we’d had a warming due to CO2, this should appear as a deviation from the simple harmonic model since 1950. There are no signs of any additional heating due to CO2 as IPCC claims in their reports. Also CO2 effects of climate models for the IPCC based are exaggerated. The net effect of CO2 is thus so modest that it can not be seen in this data.
A simple, empirical, harmonic climate model
by Jan-Erik Solheim and Ole Humlum
