http://wattsupwiththat.com/?s=Scafetta+on+60+year+climate+oscillations

WUWT has this:-

George Taylor, former Oregon State climatologist writes:

“Nicola Scafetta has published the most decisive indictment of GCM’s I’ve ever read in the Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics. His analysis is purely phenomenological, but he claims that over half of the warming observed since 1975 can be tied to 20 and 60-year climate oscillations driven by the 12 and 30-year orbital periods of Jupiter and Saturn, through their gravitational influence on the Sun, which in turn modulates cosmic radiation.

If he’s correct, then all GCM’s are massively in error because they fail to show any of the observed oscillations.

There have been many articles over the years which indicated that there were 60-year cycles in the climate, but this is the first one I’ve seen which ties them to planetary orbits.”

- George

file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/User1/Desktop/Solar%20Celestial/Scafetta%20on%2060%20year%20climate%20oscillations%20_%20Watts%20Up%20With%20That.htm

There is also a link to the paper at that post.

I’ve just started reading 5. Reconstruction and forecast of the climate oscillations, after reading 4. Analysis of the coherence, where Scafetta says:-

“The good coherence between the celestial and the temperature records indicate that the two records are a compatible physical information. The Earth’s climate just looks synchronized to the oscillations of the solar system.

The failure of the climate models, which use all known climate forcing and mechanisms, to reproduce the temperature oscillations at multiple timescales, including the large 60 year temperature modulation, indicates that the current climate models are missing fundamental mechanisms. The above findings indicate with a very high statistical confidence level that major climate forcings have astronomical origin and that these forcings are not included in the current climate models“.

Highly recommended reading.

The Weather Channel also pointed out that the conditions needed were:

1) Clear sky. (i.e. no cloud layer blocking IR).

2) Still air. (i.e. no turbulent processes mixing the air and a lack of convective processes).

3) Dry air. (i.e. the water vapor content had to be taken out of the air for the IR to be free to leave).

So what does that LEAVE in the air? CO2.

Now think about this for a minute. If you have ANY of: Convection, barometric driven mixing, clouds, water vapor, water droplets; then IR does not dominate. With them all removed, and with the CO2 left in place, we have the full “CO2 Forcing” in effect (but unobscured by other drivers).

And what did we get? A New All Time Record Low.

http://chiefio.wordpress.com/2011/01/22/frostbite-falls/

Satellite temperature data since 1978: moderate 1.4C/century warming trend

http://c3headlines.typepad.com/.a/6a010536b58035970c0148c7b83300970c-pi

Last 10 years of sattelite temperature data: global warming only 0.8C/century rate (0.08C/decade, slightly more than the 0.02 from the trend in the post)

http://c3headlines.typepad.com/.a/6a010536b58035970c0147e1af1a59970b-pi

Both plots from this C3 post (in a similar vein to this CCG post)

http://www.c3headlines.com/2011/01/satellite-data-confirms-global-warming-has-significantly-declined-over-past-10-years-by-2012-it-may-.html

“………over the last 30-years, the highly accurate satellite temperatures reveal a per century temperature trend on only 1.4°C – a trend that is substantially below all climate model and IPCC climate “expert” predictions. In addition, the above chart also depicts a wide variation of temperatures, which obviously has little relationship to the straight-line, linear growth of CO2 levels. In fact, as the empirical data represents, major warming and cooling phases are predominantly driven by the large ocean cycles, not by trace human CO2 emissions in the atmosphere.

The most current satellite measurements though, as shown in this second chart, confirm that the per century global warming trend has now declined to an almost unmeasurable 0.8°C per century trend. This century-long trend, based on science’s most accurate measurement technology, is literally a fraction of what the United Nations and national climate climate agencies predicted (per their antiquated, completely CO2-myopic computer climate models). And if the current La Nina extends well into 2011, the per century temperature 10-year trend may well turn into negative territory.

Clearly, the world’s best and most advanced technology is now establishing that the UN’s IPCC/Climategate group has radically overestimated global warming, by many multiples. And, as the latest ten-year satellite data confirms, global warming is on an obvious, observed path towards a condition of global cooling. Definitely not good, if that continues.”

@David, would Nicola Scafetta qualify for “the opionions, methods and data held by or used by the majority of experts in a given field” or is he not one of the majority?

EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE FOR A CELESTIAL ORIGIN OF THE CLIMATE OSCILLATIONS AND ITS IMPLICATIONS

Scafetta, Submitted May 2010

http://www.fel.duke.edu/~scafetta/pdf/scafetta-JSTP2.pdf

BTW, you will see in the paper that his phenomenological model beats a CO2 forced model.and that much of the global warming since 1970 has been induced by the combined effect of natural climate drivers.

[SNIP - Richard, you risk alienating our guest. ]