[Robert A Cook PE]

True, very true.

And, more importantly, if (as appears correct) we are at (or even near) the max of a long-duration sinewave cycle, then the gradual slip from that max occurs also in spits and spurts - the reduction in temperature will not be a smooth drop either.

Any given year may be higher or lower than its predecessor. And of course, if we are at a gain of +.8 degree, then it will take 4-6 years to drop back to even "average" temperatures.

And, all that time is enough for the propagandists to continue their war against the US economy.

But, as pointed out, the critical thing to see is that average tmperatures have NOT increased the past 8 years (1998 through 2006-2007: they HAVE remained steady, DESPITE the tremendous increase in greenhouses gasses from China and India and Brazil over those 8 years!

[cogitator]

But, as pointed out, the critical thing to see is that average tmperatures have NOT increased the past 8 years (1998 through 2006-2007: they HAVE remained steady, DESPITE the tremendous increase in greenhouses gasses from China and India and Brazil over those 8 years!

There's no expectation of linearity in a chaotic system, and the CO2 concentration is only going up a couple ppm. Over time, that becomes significant. In any given year, that's not much different than the year before. (Remember, you liked my post about the difference between climate and weather - a decade is barely enough to discern climate trends.

But... imagine if there had not been a monstrous El Nino in 1998, and it had been a normal or just slightly warmer year due to a moderate El Nino. Then what would the trend look like? 1998 threw off everything -- it yanked a small positive trend significantly higher, and it's so big that it disturbs perception of the underlying trend.