exactly... the point. and man made co2 is just a small fraction of CO2. which is just a very smart part of the greenhouse gas situation. which science is showing acts as a thermostat ... it may cause cooling in the upper atmosphere and keep in a some warmth in the lower... we are not even sure CO2 it nets out to warming. So its not surprising science can not show that man made co2 causes warming.
Hey asshole, despite what you have been fed by right-wing propaganda, the models haven't failed. Your brain has.
Ok which of the multiple rounds of IPCC models predicted that no warming would occur over the last 16 years. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...-report-quietly-released--chart-prove-it.html This âplateauâ in rising temperatures does not mean that global warming wonât at some point resume. But according to increasing numbers of serious climate scientists, it does suggest that the computer models that have for years been predicting imminent doom, such as those used by the Met Office and the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, are flawed, and that the climate is far more complex than the models assert. âThe new data confirms the existence of a pause in global warming,â Professor Judith Curry, chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Science at Americaâs Georgia Tech university, told me yesterday. âClimate models are very complex, but they are imperfect and incomplete. Natural variability [the impact of factors such as long-term temperature cycles in the oceans and the output of the sun] has been shown over the past two decades to have a magnitude that dominates the greenhouse warming effect. âIt is becoming increasingly apparent that our attribution of warming since 1980 and future projections of climate change needs to consider natural internal variability as a factor of fundamental importance.â Professor Phil Jones, director of the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, who found himself at the centre of the âClimategateâ scandal over leaked emails three years ago, would not normally be expected to agree with her. Yet on two important points, he did. The data does suggest a plateau, he admitted, and without a major El Nino event â the sudden, dramatic warming of the southern Pacific which takes place unpredictably and always has a huge effect on global weather â âit could go on for a whileâ. Like Prof Curry, Prof Jones also admitted that the climate models were imperfect: âWe donât fully understand how to input things like changes in the oceans, and because we donât fully understand it you could say that natural variability is now working to suppress the warming. We donât know what natural variability is doing.â Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...y-released--chart-prove-it.html#ixzz2bz08usk0 Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
I was going to ask you to prove they had not failed FC.... but we have graphs proving the failure below.... a. the article is the first link b. the straight line graph the second c. the third graph is the spaghetti plot of the predictions of 73 climate models.... compared with the actual observations of temperatures... Warning... so you don't miss the observations data... The observed temps.... are at the bottom of the chart..... far below the temps predicted by 73 climate models. http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/06/...ail-spencer-the-day-of-reckoning-has-arrived/ http://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/CMIP5-73-models-vs-obs-20N-20S-MT.png http://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/CMIP5-73-models-vs-obs-20N-20S-MT-5-yr-means1.png