On Sunday, 27 March 2016 10:29:17 UTC+1, Bob Martin wrote:
in 434962 20160326 205558 Lawrence Jenkins wrote:
On Saturday, 26 March 2016 18:50:44 UTC, Graham P Davis wrote:
On Sat, 26 Mar 2016 17:40:45 GMT
Martin Dixon wrote:

In message
Paul Garvey wrote:

Err Martin. Why do you feel you know better than 99.99% of published
scientists?

No, of course I don't, although I probably know more about climate
than quite a lot of them, especially those who work in completely
different areas like medicine, chemistry etc. and have never studied
climatology.

And you know more about climatology than 98% of climatologists?


But then, there was a time when most published scientists believed
that the sun orbited the earth, even astronomers....

There is an interesting paper on Watts at the moment (I linked to it
in another thread) that explains recent warming in terms of natural
climate cycles. It is obvious that such cycles exist. We shall know
whether or not that is correct fairly soon, around 2020 if I
understand it correctly.



Natural cycles predicted that the global temperatures would be colder
now than at any time since the early 19th century. So much for that
theory!

How about some of the other non-CO2 ideas for explaining away global
warming?

Solar output has been falling whilst global temperatures have been
rising so I think that's another theory that can be consigned to file
13. Mind you, Brooks managed to do that before the Festival of Britain.

According to one of Lawrence's heroes, Joe *******i, global temperatures
would fall back to normal during the negative cycle of the PDO. That
index started dropping in the early 80s but air temperatures kept
going up.


As no natural explanations even get the temperature graph pointing in
the right direction, what about CO2 theory?

CO2 theory correctly predicted the rate of global warming over the past
forty years.

CO2 theory also predicted that the stratosphere would cool. It did.

CO2 theory predicted that the Arctic would warm much faster than the
rest of the globe. It has.

Taking predictions made about forty years ago, only those based on CO2
theory have proved correct.

--
Graham P Davis, Bracknell, Berks. [Retd meteorologist/programmer]
http://www.scarlet-jade.com/
I wear the cheese. It does not wear me.
Posted with Claws: http://www.claws-mail.org/

The last interglacial was a lot warmer so far than this one. Hippopotami on grazing the Thames and
all that,

The Thames was in a different part of the planet then.


Well, I have to say that when compared to when I was a boy visiting the Thames in London it really does feel like its now in a different part of the planet.

I do note with interest that tectonic theory says the Thames will be well up in the Arctic circle in 51 million years.


I have to say I cannot believe that all that mass of energy/heat that drives the tectonic process like a giant lava lamp does not affect ocean temperatures. We are sitting on a massive storage radiator