Inhofe to UN Climate Conference in Durban: Kyoto Process is Dead

No description available.

• Category

  News & Politics

[1000frolly]

OK its got warmer.

SO WHAT?

[1000frolly]

But I agree that AGW is occuring!

The argument is about HOW MUCH human emissions is, or will change the temperature.

This, as you probably know already, depends on climate sensitivty.

There is no empirical evidence for positive feedback in the climate system; though this is suggested by models.

But there is empirical evidence for strong negative feedback; an estimate of climate sensitivity of around 0.15 is the accepted figure.

Christy 2007, Lindsen & Choi 2009,2011; Spencer&Brasswell 2008,2010

[uknowispeaksense]

Apologies. That last comment was directed at koyettsu. That'll teach me for statying up late. For you I reiterate, find me a single paper produced by a climate scientist that provides evidence that AGW is not occurring.

[1000frolly]

I gave you a nice source, sonny boy; (Bray & Von Storch) which you were happy with, now what's troubling you?

[uknowispeaksense]

You must be reading a different source to me...whatever. This is all propaganda anyway.I'm still waiting for you to produce a single paper from a climate scientist that disputes AGW. Make sure its recent. Stuff from the 1970's doesn't count.

[1000frolly]

In Q21, only 34% very much agreed. 31% agreeing, 17% slightly agree

Total agree = 82%

Remember; of the respondents 78% are modellers

Asked in 1996 ‘whether climate change is mostly the result of anthropogenic causes’, less than half (40%) of the respondents said it was. But in 2003 the figure rose to more than half (53%) (2007, fig. 30). In 2008, an even greater proportion (84%) was ‘convinced’ that ‘most of recent or near future climate change is, or will be, a result of anthropogenic causes’.