Dr. Antero Ollila
June 1, 2024
The warming spike in 2023 has caused extraordinary reactions among climate scientists but also comment that nothing unusual is going on and everything fits into the “natural variability” calculated by climate models.
Mika Rantanen and Ari Laaksonen, researchers at the Finnish Meteorological Institute, proved in their study (Reference 1) that September 2023 was the warmest with a difference of 0.5°C and that its occurrence is statistically very unlikely (in normal language impossible) to be caused by greenhouse gases. NASA administrator Gavin Schmidt acknowledged in his World View article in the journal Nature 19 March 2024 that in 2023, temperatures were 0.2°C higher each month than previous records and because greenhouse gases have been able to raise temperatures from 2023 only 0.02°C, ”perhaps we are in uncharted territory”. This statement was unexpected and extraordinary expressed by the firm supporter of the IPCC science.
My study titled “The 2023 record temperatures: correlation to absorbed shortwave radiation anomaly” was published on 25 April 2023 in the journal Science of Climate Changes and shows that the cause of warming in 2023 after the temperature pause from 2015 onwards, is fully known and can be verified based on satellite measurements.
My research shows that the IPCC does not accept the shortwave radiation values measured in its report AR6 in its warming calculations, but calculates that the resulting warming is caused by greenhouse gases only, i.e. makes a double error. I showed that behind this climate science lies the wider problem of computer models, namely the positive feedback of water, which leads to the temperature values of computer models escaping far too high.
The absorbed solar radiation anomaly (ASR) has increased from 2001 to 2023 total of 1.81 W/m2, which is about the same as the radiative forcing (RF) value of the carbon dioxide in the AR6 in 2019. The IPCC and the leading climate researchers have not recognised the ASR even though it is based on direct satellite observations of the CERES satellites operated by NASA.
The admittance of the ASR value of 1.81 W/m2 would mean a temperature impact of 0.85°C according to the IPCC science. If this value is added to the last warming value of 1.27°C in the AR6, the warming value would be 2.12°C. This value would alert also the media about the validity of climate models. It would raise questions about the water feedback issue and the radiative forcing value of carbon dioxide of 560 ppm concentration: 3.93 W/m2 of the AR6 and 2.4…2,6 W/m2 reported by contrarian researchers.
Climate researchers have continued to study the trend of the Earth’s Energy Imbalance (EEI) as an explanation for increased ASR even though its accuracy issue is much more challenging than the ASR measurement accuracy. Originally the EEI research studies were carried out to point out that the extra energy received through the ASR anomaly increase has gone to the deep ocean. Now this explanation passed away since the global temperature increased anyway. Climate researchers have no other choice than to continue this game that the ASR is not capable of increasing temperature. Not even we know that 99,97% of the energy of the Earth originates from the Sun. The official message of the IPCC is that climate change is anthropogenic and the natural causes may have only short-term impacts like La Nina.
This figure depicts the global temperature (GISS), the ENSO temperature effect, carbon dioxide radiative forcing by the IPCC and the Solar Radiation Absorption (ASR) change according to the CERES observations by NASA. The temperature changes follow the ASR changes very well. ENSO temperature effects have about a 6-month delay on the global temperature. That is why the present La Nina temperature effects will have the maximum impact in May-Juni 2024 even though its maximum was in December 2023 and it can explain the exceptionally high temperatures of 2023 only partially.
The radiative forcing effect of carbon dioxide has been insignificant during 2013 – 2023 if compared to the ASR effect.
