****************************EXCERPT*********************************************
Bill Illis says:
This was actually already known, it just wasn’t widely known or promoted by the pro-AGW scientists for obvious reasons.
The climate models project that this -21 W/m2 (might be as high as -30 W/m2) and project that it will turn into -20 W/m2 in a doubling scenario. So it is projected as a net +1.0 W/m2 feedback, about half of the feedbacks shown by the IPCC in its most recent report.
This is an illogical result in that more clouds (also predicted) should be even more negative rather than less negative. Having this feedback be +2 W/m2 or -2 W/m2 will be a make or break feature in the global warming debate and, hence, the spirited response to Spencer and Braswell from Trenberth, Dessler and the Team.
******************************EXCERPT**********************************************
Criminogenic, were not in a permanent ice age for 2 reasons:
1. if CERN is correct, then the cloud cover varies by intensity of the sun’s activity
2. cooler = less evaporation = less available water vapor for creating clouds.
Thus, in clouds, we have a self-regulating system with the absolute setting determined by the input of the sun, the relative setting determined by water vapor availability.