Dr. Willie Soon is an astrophysicist and a geoscientist based in Massachusetts, USA. He co-authored the book ‘Canary in a Climate World: Climate Realism vs. The Net Zero Myth’, which was published earlier this year.
The book challenges alarmist climate narratives and Net Zero policies, and features contributions from 38 experts across diverse fields including physics, climatology, economics, law, psychology and medicine.
The following are some highlights from Chapter 2.
Let’s not lose touch…Your Government and Big Tech are actively trying to censor the information reported by The Exposé to serve their own needs. Subscribe to our emails now to make sure you receive the latest uncensored news in your inbox…
The following is extracted from Watts Up With That’s ‘Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup #706’.
Writing for Climate Change Nexus, John Robson begins his description of the chapter by astrophysicist Willie Soon in ‘Canary In a Climate World’ by discussing the efforts of outside groups to oust Soon from the Harvard-Smithsonian Observatory. But Soon does not mention this in his chapter. Instead, Soon focuses on his work and the founding of the Centre for Environmental Research and Earth Sciences (“CERES” or “CERES-Science”) with the late Michael Connolly and Ronan Connolly. Soon writes:
“For over thirty years, my research has focused on solar physics, solar irradiance, and solar-terrestrial interactions. The work – conducted with colleagues including Dr. Michael Connolly and Dr. Ronan Connolly – shows that variations in solar output and magnetic activity are not peripheral effects. They are fundamental drivers of comate variability on decadal to centennial timescales. When these solar influences are properly accounted for, the dominance attributed to carbon dioxide becomes far less certain.”
Robson sums some of the biases Soon identifies in the surface temperature datasets and its consequences as follows:
Soon discusses the way urbanisation contaminates global temperature datasets. We all know that measurements collected in Urban Heat Islands are biased towards too much warming. The IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] deals with it by blending the urban with rural data, then claims without proof that any remaining bias in the warming trend is less than ten per cent. But, Soon points out, all that approach does is spread the bias out to rural data. When he and his co-authors have assembled rural-only data sets, surely the obvious way to eliminate urban distortions, about eighty per cent of the warming over the last century or so disappears.
Soon also discusses the difficulty of reconstructing solar variability prior to the satellite era. There are over two dozen such reconstructions in the literature, some of which imply the Sun contributed nothing to climate change and some which imply the Sun can explain almost all of it. He and his colleagues have compiled the range of estimates and documented how the IPCC narrowed the list of which ones they cite down to those that, of course, show no influence of the Sun on climate.
He also discusses the way biased climate science feeds directly into faulty climate policy. And how the connection to politics leads to self-reinforcing corruption mechanisms in climate science. And, he wisely cautions:
“This does not require malicious intent. It requires only normal behaviour within constrained systems. Young scientists quickly learn which questions are ‘safe’ to ask and which are not. Entire disciplines begin to self-censor, not through explicit prohibition, but through career survival … The result is a form of scientific monoculture.”
These observations are not merely sensible. They are the result of harsh experience, from someone who experienced it all on the inside and lived to [talk] about it.
#Canary in a Climate World: Willie Soon, Climate Discussion Nexus, 9 September 2026
Dr. Soon is a director of SEPP [Science and Environmental Policy Project] and a recipient of the Frederick Seitz Memorial Award. In his chapter, Soon asserts [boldface in text added]:
Detection Is Not Attribution
The IPCC distinguishes between detecting climate change and attributing its causes. Even if warming is detected, attribution requires correctly identifying the mechanisms driving that change.
Here, the IPCC places overwhelming emphasis on anthropogenic greenhouse gases while minimising natural forcings such as solar variability and volcanic activity. This imbalance is not supported by the broader scientific literature.
Carbon dioxide may account for some warming since approximately 1970, but it fails to explain earlier climate variations. Solar variability, by contrast, aligns with temperature changes across centuries.
Soon discusses Solar Variability and Climate Across Time, then continues as follows [emphasis added]:
The Sun’s Role: Reduced by Design
There are at least 27 published reconstructions of total solar irradiance, representing different interpretations of how solar output has varied over time. Some show relatively modest change; others indicate substantially larger variability capable of influencing Earth’s climate.
Earlier IPCC reports referenced multiple solar reconstructions. By the Sixth Assessment Report in 2021, the IPCC relied on a single low-variability solar model, despite no decisive advances in solar physics that would invalidate the others. This narrowing of acceptable estimates did not result from new evidence but from selective exclusion.
Even satellite-era measurements of solar irradiance are not free from uncertainty. Different instruments and calibration methods yield different absolute baselines, and the process of stitching multiple satellite records together requires assumptions that directly affect long-term trends. These uncertainties are often comparable in magnitude to the incremental radiative forcing attributed to increases in carbon dioxide, yet they are rarely acknowledged in public-facing attribution claims.
By choosing a solar reconstruction that minimises variability, the IPCC ensures that the Sun’s contribution appears negligible, an outcome driven by selective and biased procedures rather than by physics.
What Comprehensive Attribution Studies Reveal
In a major multi-author review involving researchers from 18 countries, we examined multiple temperature datasets alongside both anthropogenic and natural forcing factors. When broader solar reconstructions are included, natural variability explains a substantial fraction of observed climate change.
The assertion that natural climate drivers have been ruled out is therefore untenable.
Solar variability does not merely “contribute” to climate change; it structures it. Ignoring this fact distorts attribution and leads to flawed conclusions.
Soon then discusses the policy consequences of incomplete science and why the climate narrative became locked in. His conclusion states [Boldface in text added]:
Conclusion
Climate science must be grounded in observation, physics and full representation of natural variability. When urban heat island effects are properly accounted for and when the Sun’s variability is honestly incorporated, the narrative of carbon dioxide as the dominant climate driver weakens considerably.
The Sun has shaped Earth’s climate for billions of years. To assume it has suddenly become irrelevant is not science – it is pure speculation or [an] invalidated assumption.
If natural variability plays a significant role, as the evidence indicates, then policies focused exclusively on carbon dioxide are unlikely to deliver their promised outcomes. More importantly, a scientific system that discourages fundamental questions about data quality, measurement integrity and natural drivers risks losing public trust altogether.
Scientific progress depends on the willingness to question foundational assumptions, to follow evidence wherever it leads and to tolerate dissent – especially when science is being used to justify profound societal change.
For the link to Robson’s comments, see ‘Challenging the Orthodoxy’; for the CERES-Science website, see HERE, especially the publications link. Item # 16 [listed under CERES’ ‘Publications’] gives the link to ‘The Detection and Attribution of Northern Hemisphere Land Surface Warming (1850–2018) in Terms of Human and Natural Factors: Challenges of Inadequate Data’ by multiple authors published in Climate on 28 August 2023, and Item #17 gives the link to ‘Challenges in the Detection and Attribution of Northern Hemisphere Surface Temperature Trends Since 1850’ published in Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics on 27 September 2023.
[You can read Watts Up With That’s full weekly news roundup, which covers other stories in addition to the one above, HERE.
The Expose Urgently Needs Your Help…
Can you please help to keep the lights on with The Expose’s honest, reliable, powerful and truthful journalism?
Your Government & Big Tech organisations
try to silence & shut down The Expose.
So we need your help to ensure
we can continue to bring you the
facts the mainstream refuses to.
The government does not fund us
to publish lies and propaganda on their
behalf like the Mainstream Media.
Instead, we rely solely on your support. So
please support us in our efforts to bring
you honest, reliable, investigative journalism
today. It’s secure, quick and easy.
Please choose your preferred method below to show your support.
Categories: Breaking News, Latest News, World News
“Dominance attributed to CO2 becomes far less less certain ”
Less certain? It has nothing to do with climate change.
It has been established that increased levels of CO2 come after
the warming of the climate.
How does anyone take seriously the idea that CO2, which is
essential for plant growth, consisting of .004% of the atmosphere
can dictate the climate.
Thank you for posting this. In the last few years I have seen several videos of this brilliant man exposing the lies. I am now going to see if I can afford his book. Of course it will be without his funny presentation, but I still would like to read it. Thanks again!