00

Firstly my first calculation takes the 33 degrees and calculates a rate of warming based on energy intercepted assuming all the warming is due to CO2. As Mr Hother points out, most of that warming is NOT due to CO2 – but of course that results in a sensitivity to CO2 that is much, much LESS than my calculation of .39 degrees per percent energy extracted. My calculation shows the maximum warming sensitivity demonstrated due to any cause – including ALL feedbacks and attributes it all to CO2. It is a classic bounds test and at 0.39 per percent energy extraction by CO2 it forcasts an absolute maximum bound of 39 degrees above blackbody equating to no more than 0.43 degrees per CO2 doubling assuming CO2 causes all warming,( that is, you must reduce this Number some amount for every degree of warming that is NOT caused by CO2). I made that very clear.

Secondly, it is true that you can pick a particular period of warming you can calculate a sensitivity greater than my average since the LIA, perhaps you claiming that only some CO2 rise causes warming – that CO2 can tell the time, and the CO2 rise between 1850 and 1958 doesn’t affect climate but the bit after does?

Even so, using your own chosen period the calculated warming is barely 1.9 degrees per doubling, a degree and a bit below the IPCC central estimate, and a full 2.5 degrees per doubling below the high end, and some 6 and a bit degrees below the UNSW estimate of 8 degrees per doubling. Of course the scientists that wrote AR5 acknowledge that only about 50 percent of your warming is CO2 induced, cutting your sensitivity estimate to 0.95 based on your own figures.

I think Mr Shehan and Mr Hother, you have have just proved my case for me, and I thank you for that. Warming sensitivity is low, somewhere between 0.4 and 1. Since the initial bounds test shows that the IPCC estimate for warming VS energy extracted is a factor of 10 too high, the lower end of that range is the most reasonable conclusion, but listen, I’ll not object if you tell your warmist buddies that sensitivity is an unalarming 0.95 degree per doubling, let’s not quibble over a few tenths of one degree

Jo, pity they will never read this, but someone might one day

10

10

Interesting name, VirusP53. I sometimes wonder why people choose such “cute” names when they want to remain anonymous. Personally I’ve always used my real name when commenting on something, even in letters to the editor that I know will be read by my neighbors. I follow that practice even when I have something to say that I know may not be received well by my neighbors or by the other readers of this blog. I figure that if it’s worth saying then it’s worth attaching my name to it.

The benefit of identifying myself is that it keeps me honest. I don’t like embarrassing myself as you just did with an off the wall statement that good unambiguous empirical data can prove is false.

Have a nice day, VirusP53. And consider what I just said.

Now with regard to Antarctica: The ice overlaying the Antarctic land mass is not only not melting, it’s getting deeper and deeper. Only the ice that floats on the adjoining water has ever been measured to be melting. Floating ice has a serious problem that the water under it will be above freezing and can transfer heat to the ice with the inevitable result that the ice undergoes a state change from solid to liquid — it melts. If snowfall doesn’t keep up with the melt the ice diminishes and when it exceeds the melt the ice increases.

I’m sure you can apply the same physics lesson to the Arctic.

None of this means anything except that the weather is both variable and quite unpredictable.

00

00

01

Antarctic just happens to be so huge it is not noticed as much

Yes, that’s why those idiots got their boat stuck… all that frikken ice melting caught them by surprise!!!!

You know, it’s reaaly funny that you warmists like to call us skeptics “deniers”, yet you fail to see your own desperation and denial when you deny the fact that Antarctica has more ice than ever previously recorded. You all just keep bleating “It’s melting, It’s melting!!!” when clearly it’s GROWING.

00

Flannery has held a Masters of Earth Sciences degree since 1981

That sir is an outright lie. Tim Flannery’s MSc is in geology.

“All my strongest memories are really of the sort of people I met when I came into the geology department of Monash University. Before that, I’d done a humanities degree and I was desperate to study science.” – Tim Flannery

00

We are WELL BELOW the RWP and way , way below the temps of the Holocene Optimum.

The Holocene trend has been downwards basically all the way, and the small warming of the second half of last century was just a small ripple.

YOU are welcome to go back 300 years to the depths of the LIA if that’s what you want.. just move to Siberia or somewhere like that.

Me, I much prefer the Current Warm Period..

http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/histo3.png
“In fact for the entire Holocene — the period over which, by some odd coincidence, humanity developed agriculture and civilization — the temperature has been higher than now, and the trend over the past 4000 years is a marked decline. From this perspective, it’s the LIA that was unusual, and the current warming trend simply represents a return to the mean. If it lasts.”

10

Yes please tell us according to whom has CO2 shown to have little impact on temps … Every temp record since records have been kept are getting smashed year after year .. Ice Core Data going back 800,000 years shows a direct correlation with CO2 level and temps ..

Where is your own proof that CO2 has been the cause? The planet has been coming out of The Little Ice Age… it should be expected that temperature records are “smashed” all of the time. This proves NOTHING.

20

Science is about proving something wrong yet no one has

You have no idea whatsoever what science is…. clearly.

Yes, its about proving something wrong, however that something wrong would be the NULL hypothesis, not your AGW.

00

I wake up in the morning thinking there are lots of times when people have woken up feeling like this, like the Old Testament prophets.

This planet, this Gaia, will have acquired a brain and a nervous system. That will make it act as a living animal, as a living organism, at some sort of level.

The guy is a certifiable nutcase.

00

Watch the senate re-election in WA and Griffith by-election for a Anti Abbott vote

Ha ha ha ha….. ja ja ja ja (Spanish version!).

You rusted on leftards are truly truly hilarious!

00

The overall TREND is temperatures have risen you can go back 400,000 or 800,000 years of ice core data to see this as well

That is really really funny. If you look at things on that scale then you will quickly see that today’s temperatures are on the low side. You will also see that today’s level of atmospheric CO2 is on the VERY LOW side…. so low in fact that the entire planet could be said to be on the brink of extinction (death to all at 150ppm).

21

10