Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Ward
Yes. What about a positive number, even a cherry picked 0.04 don't you get?
Wait 500 years..or at least well past an election cycle....you get 2 degrees...wait 5,000..or roughly recorded human history... and you get 20 degrees.... I would think a run of 70C degree days would kill most flora/fauna. Let it run a little longer and we can make a cup of tea....just leave the kettle outside for a bit.
The executive summary, which I've quoted directly, twice now, includes sources other than Hadley, and indicates a much higher figure.
Again, the 15 years Hadley data is positive. The Stefan-Boltzmann law is not a homily or fantasy.
So the IPCC executive statement is wrong? I think not.
Critical thought. Give it a try.
|
Again, you have unequivocally stated what I said about the Hiatus was rubbish.
And again you choose to waltz around the issue, without providing any supporting information (leaving it to me to go find it, because you are too slack?). You even call Hadcrut4 data, which together with Hadcrut3 has pretty much been the main driver of the warming debate, cherry picked - even though the IPCC cites it. Astonishing.
And again you refuse to unequivocally acknowledge or deny the existence of an Hiatus - something that is unequivocally acknowledged by the IPCC. They invented the term.
So what is your problem?
Why do you not say "I do not believe it, and where the term Hiatus was first created and used - in the IPCC documents - is rubbish"?
Or "I do believe it, but it really doesn't matter - and I apologise for saying what you said was rubbish?"
I look forward to your next waltz around this.
Regards,
Renato