Search results

I'd wager considerable money on that bet, lol.

I will stipulate that the climate has changed before, without the aid of man. That was never in doubt...

In other words, untestable. You can't produce a hypothesis to test against mechanisms which are unknown. Again, to claim this is more likely than a physical explanation we have that is consistent with known physics is fallacious. It's not logical, and not a supportable assertion. If you wish to...

The climate responds to perturbations, which have associated forcings. A forcing is measured as watts per square meter. 1. You haven't said yet which natural factors you think are forcing the climate, you've identified evidence of natural forcings in the past and events but you haven't...

Another manufactured scandal you mean. It's always bad news for the IPCC : Deltoid

Yup, those would be the "dynamic changes" which the IPCC warned they have not included in their forecasts, hence why they underestimate reality.

Oh yes Extra, I almost forgot. Please provide some scholarly material for the three times the surface warming in the tropics figure. Also, please explain how this is different than what would be expected if it were not greenhouse gases, say increased solar. I will actually read any scholarly...

There's a shocker. Leave it to someone who will analyze the results, and not publish under the rigors of review. Anyways, what I cited is direct evidence which refutes your claims. If you don't wish to examine it for yourself, then there's not much more to discuss. Well if the warming the...

Didn't convert from MSOffice very well...

Amongst those who do not believe that human industry could possibly alter our climate, the primary response is that the climate always changes, and that this is entirely natural. The climate does often change, but to interpret that the changes we see now are natural requires data confirming this...

Did you read David Barber's paper on sea ice conditions Cobalt? Rotten ice they called it. I think this will be a significant contribution in the future studies to square observations with model output, if the Arctic sea ice continues it's accelerated ice loss, unforseen by the models.

This makes no sense. To go back to the car analogy, we can ease off of emitting heat trapping pollutants. That is the same as shifting the transmission in the speeding car into neutral. Over time the Earth systems will "coast" the temperature back to normal. You talk of all this as though what...

Better question: who said the Arctic would be ice free in the Winter? Seriously, whom was it that said that would happen? Or is this a red herring?

Are you serious? A recent analogy: If you own a certain car that say has a problem with the accelerator, and you find yourself accelerating out of control, there's nothing you can do?

You need better eyes, and better graphics to see clearly. Such as: It's a nice graphic, and-click to embiggen- large format! :-P

Steven Goddard via WTF is confident in results confirming climate model ouput.

Perhaps he can explain then the discrepancy between ocean heat content, and his findings of stable sea level. Thermal expansion is basic physics, and we have plenty of observations indicating that the world ocean is heating up. He shouldn't denigrate people who use computer models...he after...

lol Pack your bags Walt, zero hour 9am. You'll be high as a kite by then.