Valentina Zharkova 4 years ago edited
Three authors (VZ, SS, EP) wish to protest the paper retraction as a cover up of the discovered new solar forcing mechanism affecting the Earth and other planets. SZ asked the Editor to remove his name from the paper authors that the Editor did not acknowledge.
The retraction note from the Editor R. Marszalek is misleading because we do not calculate in the paper the distance between the Sun and Earth. The main topic of the paper was the oscillation of magnetic field baseline.
In the paper we discovered 2100 year oscillations of this baseline field, which correlated with variations of solar irradiance and terrestrial temperature. All of these were observational results not dependent on the mechanism which causes these oscillations. Only in the last section we looked at possible mechanisms. We found that the solar inertial motion can lead to the change of this magnetic field baseline, irradiance because of the change of Sun-Earth distance based on some other research done by many researchers since 1965. We did not calculate this distance, but used only for illustration that solar irradiance change if the distance change
This is the very fact of the changing S-E distance, which the Editor and AGW people objected very strongly and wanted to hide from general public.
We believe, this retraction is a cover up of the important solar forcing input not considered before in any terrestrial models.
Confirmation of these words comes from the New Scientist post, which was commented by the two AGW leaders G. Schmidt (NASA) and K.Rice (Edinburg University, UK)
https://www.newscientist.co....
Hence, the main reason the Editor retracted the paper is that we declared that the Sun-Earth distance changes over the period of 2100-2200 years known as Hallstatt's cycle from solar irradiance investigation (Steinhilber et al, 2012).
The authors prepared their responses to the Editor's text which can be found here
http://mpee.northumbria.ac.... sent to the Mr Marszalek but he did not publish them that is contrary to the rules.
Our paper can be found on the e-archive
https://arxiv.org/abs/2002.... where for the illustration we have marked in blue some tiny changes which we would do now using the JPL ephemeris showing that S-E distance changes with the rate of 0.00027 au per 100 years, or 0.0027 au per 1000 years. This is again contrary to what the Editor, and post-publication reviewers claimed, who still insist this S-E distance does not change.
Well, in addition you can read our erratum paper published on the site
http://mpee.northumbria.ac.... where one can see the plot of the Sun-Earth distance extracted directly from JPL ephemeris and some other plots.
After we submitted to the Editor in September 2019 this plot obtained for the effect of four large planets on the Sun-Earth distance, the website
http://www.alcyone.de removed the option to calculate the Sun-Earth distance with the effects of 4 large planets!
You can make your own judgements.
Kind regards
Valentina Zharkova
