The War of the Graphs - Climate Change: Identification and Projections - page 34

Even modern TSI measurements are not safe from controversy. In a letter
(16 September 2008) 11 , addressed to his assistant Nicola Scafetta 12 , Richard
Willson, in charge of the satellite measurement system ACRIM (Active
Cavity Radiometer Irradiance Monitor), complained that Frohlich and Lean
[FRO 04] had made unjustified modifications to their TSI measurements
(Figure 3.3, taken from AR4).
Figure 3.3. TSI by Willson and Mord1vinov (2003) and
correction by Fröhlich and Lean (2004)
The correction cancels out the increase seen since 1986, and also reduces
the possible influence of solar activity on the warming in the latter part of
the 20 th Century. Conversely, taking into account the time constant of the
climatic system, it could contribute to explaining the stagnation witnessed
after 2000. Furthermore, it could completely alter the evaluation of the ER
background correction, or Shapiro's potential modulation.
11 Source: http://climatechange.thinkaboutit.eu/think4/post/judithgate_ipcc_consensus_was_
only_one_solar_physicist/.
12 N. Scafetta studied at the University of Pisa - like Galileo. In 2014, he was published in
the second edition of the journal Pattern Recognition in Physics (Copernicus publications!).
This paper placed the Sun at the center of the climate system and concludes with a “doubt on
the continuation and even the future acceleration of the warming claimed by IPCC”. The
publisher (Martin Rasmussen) was horrified to have allowed such heresy and took the drastic
decision to take the journal out of existence. His report is stunning: http://www.pattern-
recognition-in-physics.net/.