On Sep 18, 8:29*pm, "Togless" wrote:
"Lawrence13" wrote:
Dawlish wrote:
Why do you think Arctic sea ice will return to the 1979-2008 mean in
the next decade? I don't think any scientist agrees with you.
Certainly no-one in working in the area of the cryosphere does. I'm
not the only one waiting to read your explanation with interest.-
Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Natural cooling cycles Sun and Oceans .

Can I go now Sir?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Good that you've returned, I respect that (took some doing, but I do
respect it) but no you can't. I've got no idea what you mean by that
answer and "natural cycles" are just a cop-out. What "natural cooling
cycles", or combinations of them are going to lead to summer Arctic
sea ice recovering? *Don't dodge by trying to sidetrack. Tell us what
you mean.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The same forces that have always varied our climate long before C02
was seen as an issue.

Those natural forces have been negative (indicating cooling) since mid-20th
Century, while global temperature has increased substantially and Arctic ice
has gone into accelerating decline. *See:

http://www.cawcr.gov.au/staff/jma/meehl_additivity.pdf

How can you reconcile these oppositely-directed trends?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

How an earth can I know it's still not clear what exactly causes ice
ages Milankovitch is totally proven as I believe some other theories
have done the rounds. There even been disagreement with the role of
C02 in another thread in this group. To act as if all is now known is
rather daft IMHO, I mean when one of the so called fonts of all
knowledge on AGW Trenberth bemoans as to where has all the heat gone
underlines this: yet you feel everything has now been settled . The
role of the sun and various mechanisms have been totally discounted by
the IPCC, not even seen as relevant in the earth's climate. Yet you
ask me to reconcile what you feel are indisputable truths.

Get outta here