Methuselah

I was just saying!

But 'extreme' doesn't necessarily mean cold and snowy...Exceptionally warm and wet would be equally extreme?

And, the evidence for that particular accusation of scientific fraud is where, precisely?? Or are we being surreptitiously directed back toward that laughable climategate malarkey...? It disnae matter how many time one repeats a lie: it is still a lie!

The Woo Woo Credo: http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message105868/pg1

Having perused the latest model runs, I'm going to upgrade by guess to 15.2...

A bit too teleological for me is that, 4...

Another guess: 14.2, please...

Just a simple question, really: if it wasn't there, what's the point of playing games, and pretending that there's paeleoclimatic evidence that somehow renders man-made CO2 irrelevant? Obfuscation gets tiresome, over time... Technically, you're right...But said effect must have been trivial when compared to post recent industrial processes...if only in scale.

Indeed, JB - anything prior to the Industrial Revolution was largely down to natural drivers...But, we know that already? Where has 'man-made' CO2 featured in the prehistorical record? Nowhere???

It's also further evidence - if any was really needed - of a warming planet. The oceans are, in fact, part of the planet's surface.

Right answer!

Put simply: it doesn't! Oh dear!

There's an elementary course available online. But, as with most such courses, it pays to stay until the end...The lunar surface is hardly relevant to the consideration of GHGs?

Then again, the entire edifice of quantum theory might also be 'wrong'?

You could 'argue' about a lot of things, JB; but, none of those will prove that CO2 has suddenly ceased being a GHG...We know it's a GHG; we know it's increasing, due to us. Ergo, we know it's warming the planet... What we don't know, is that all these 'as yet unquantified' solar effects do anything like what it says on the tin...Or anything like Monckton would have us believe...

I'm more comfortable than I've been for months!

It's chucking it down!

Tbh, I think that the impact of solar cycles etc. is forgone conclusion; one would have to be playing a strange game indeed, not to countenance it. Having said that, manmade CO2 is a wholly new phenomenon; it's nowhere to be found in the pre-human climatic record...So, I ask: What is the point - other than that of rhetoric - in attempting to use the aforementioned record in order to claim that manmade CO2 has no effect on climate? Is there, anywhere in the record, an increase in GHGs broadly in line with what's going on, today?

Another dry and mostly sunny day. Temps around 20-22C; a darn sight better than last week...

Still in the low 20s here so, no. Not yet...

Things definitely look rather threatening, G.

Right through the Triangle of Doom!

Whilst the projected uppers may be on the cool side, SSTs are still pretty high; it may turn out to be a tad warmer than would usually be the case?

Don't know much about hockeyschik, keith...But I'm really feeling the effects of Solar-induced global cooling right now. Great innit!

It certainly feels as if we're in for something. It's as muggy as Hell!