Global Warming - The New Socialism

[lilphil1989]

Deliberate insofar as there is a lot of commentary on how the environmental movement has been hijacked by the socialist movement and changed from a group concerned about the environment to a group of activists more interested in social change.

And so their reasons for deliberate misleading are...?

Yes many especially the IPCC ha ave said that TSI does nto affect global temps yet there are scientists and scientific papers who dispute the whole AGW theory

But solar cylces vary (approx. sinusoidally) about an average (~1366Wm-2) with a frequency of ~9years:



So they cannot contribute to long term warming.

This paper takes into account variations in solar flux, and finds that warming is greater than would be expected if this were the only forcing factor.

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/sppi_reprint_series
/a_critique_on_the_lockwood_frochlich_paper_in_the_royal_society_proceedings.html

Quote from above source:
"It is likely that both the Sun/Cosmic rays and CO2 emissions are affecting climate."
This is exactly what I have been saying.

When you get back to the raw records and look at satellite temps they correlate very well with the sun cycles.

If this were true, the global average temperature would oscillate about an average with a period of ~9 years. This is not observed. What is observed is oscillations with an additional forcing ~of the form y = sin(x) + x

Clearly this indicates that solar cycles are not the only contributing factor to global temperature changes.

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckt...ming_.html

This "paper" attacks predictions based on climatic models that we have both already agreed may be inaccurate. You seem to be arguing against a straw man here.

You also need to look at the CO2 record which does not correlate with the temperature record. For example from the 1940s - 1970s there was cooling whilst Co2 went up as there is now. We have not seen any warming for the last 10 years and the last 3 we have seen significant cooling which matches sun activity.

You seem to be confusing long term trends with single episodes.
If you look at long term atmospheric CO2 and temperature data from ice cores, there is a very strong correlation between the two. As far as I'm aware, the error bars on the data make it impossible to tell which came first, nevertheless the correlation is there:

Reports on progress in physics 68 (Institute of physics publishing 2005) available here, see page 1355.

If you look at mans contribution to CO2 its around 3% of a trace gas CO2

I don't really know what this is supposed to mean

Well the models are not only inaccurate but wildly inaccurate so much that the AGW theory fails and does not stand up to scientific method.

If this were true, no work on this subject would be printed in peer-reviewed journals.

The definition of extreme weather would be the same for both hot and cold climates. My point is science shows us that during warm periods we have less hurricanes etc.

To determine the effect of global temperature on hurricane frequency requires the use of complex climate models. Models that you happily decry when it suits your purpose. You can't have it both ways.