Comment on "The influence of planetary attractions on the solar tachocline" by Callebaut, de Jager and Duhau
arXiv:1304.2023 · doi:10.1016/j.jastp.2013.03.007
Abstract
Callebaut et al. (2012)'s claim that Scafetta (2010)'s results about a correlation between 20-year and 60-year temperature cycles and the orbital motion of Jupiter and Saturn were not confirmed by Humlum et al. (2011) is erroneous and severely misleading. Also Callebaut et al. (2012)'s absolute claim that a planetary influences on the Sun should be ruled out as a possible cause of solar variability is not conclusive because: (1) their calculations are based on simplistic classical Newtonian analytical mechanics that does not fully characterize solar physics; (2) the planetary theory of solar variation is supported by empirical findings. We show that both claims are already questioned in the scientific literature.
8 pages, 1 figure
References in corpus (8)
- Empirical evidence for a celestial origin of the climate oscillations and its implications
- Solar activity forecast with a dynamo model
- Multi-scale harmonic model for solar and climate cyclical variation throughout the Holocene based on Jupiter-Saturn tidal frequencies plus the 11-year solar dynamo cycle
- Does the Sun work as a nuclear fusion amplifier of planetary tidal forcing? A proposal for a physical mechanism based on the mass-luminosity relation
- Evidences for a quasi 60-year North Atlantic Oscillation since 1700 and its meaning for global climate change
- Climate Change Attribution Using Empirical Decomposition of Climatic Data
- Planetary harmonics in the historical Hungarian aurora record (1523-1960)
- The Mid-term and Long-term Solar Quasi-periodic Cycles and the Possible Relationship with Planetary Motions