A new paper by renowned climate scientist Willie Soon, and 24 others points out huge flaws in the politically driven conclusions of the IPCC’s climate propaganda. “How much has the Sun influenced Northern Hemisphere temperature trends? An ongoing debate” is a 71-page paper by 25 renowned scientists that contains 536 references and concludes that
By reviewing the literature and available data, we identified 16 different estimates of how the Total Solar Irradiance (TSI) has varied since the 19th century (and earlier) – see Table 1 and Figures 2 and 3. Although some of these estimates are very similar to each other, others imply quite different trends and hence can lead to different conclusions. The IPCC 5th Assessment Report (AR5) appears to have tried to overcome this problem by ignoring those datasets that give conflicting results. Worryingly, from reading Matthes et al. (2017), it appears that the CMIP6 modelling groups have been actively encouraged to consider only one estimate of TSI for the 1850-present period, i.e., the Matthes et al. (2017) dataset [110]. In terms of scientific objectivity, this seems to us to have been an approach that is not compatible with the results already published in the scientific literature and even unwise relative to the results highlighted by this paper and of other recently published works.
Connolly et al. (2022), pp. 55-56
The paper makes a number of specific recommendations to scientific researchers and closes with:
“Given the many valid dissenting scientific opinions that remain on these issues, we argue that recent attempts to force an apparent scientific consensus (including the IPCC reports) on these scientific debates are premature and ultimately unhelpful for scientific progress.”
Connolly, p. 57