Replies

LOL...

The funniest thing about those global alarmist models you just posted just struck me...

The temperature “without greenhouse gas” is falling while the solar temperature is at the highest level in 1000yrs!!!

ROTFLMPO.

Compute models: garbage in, garbage out.

lllol

Comparing the graphs in posts 178 and 214 proves very enlightening.

Looking at post 214 one clearly sees increasing solar irradience in the first half on the 20th century. The last half of the 20th century shows a new high plateau of solar irradiance. Basically, solar activity is at an all time high. (Also consistent with the posted article.) Any objective reviewer would expect global warming. More sun, more warmth.

The line in post 178 represents measured temperature. This is even easier to see in post 198. Either way, temperature goes up in the 20th century. The climb is especially steep starting in the late 70s.

So the combined data from the graphs say, more sun, more warmth. Who could possibly deny that? We'll see.

Post 178 gives a blue band that is worth studying. It is entirely theoretical. But we are told that we can rely upon it. It was developed by scientists. They use computer models. If you don’t accept the blue band, either you’re not a scientist or you work for Exon-Mobil. The blue band claims to answer the question, what would happen to temperature if there were no manmade fossil fuel emissions. The band is pretty flat across the century. In the latter half of the century, it is flat or even declining. Compare the blue and pink bands in the last half of the 20th century.

With man’s influence (pink) you get warming. Without man’s influence (blue), there is no warming. Posts 178 and 198 showed warming in the century and especially since the late 70s. But none of this warming is ascribed to the sun or any naturally occurring variable. All warming is due to man-made fossil fuel emissions, especially CO2.

It doesn't matter that solar activity has been increasing through the century and is at an all time high. Global warming theory says the sun does not matter. It could go supernova but as far as our global warming bur according to proven computer models, we’ll all be O.K. if we can only control our CO2 emissions.

This appears to tell a different story about irradiance starting in 1990 than does

which is included in references given by cogitator.

One shows irradiance without a trend in the final decade. The other shows a declining trend for this period. In principle, agreement on the facts should facilitate agreement on conclusions. Although, in this case, probably not!