CO2 causes a 1C warming if all else remains equal but in fact there appears to be a negative system response.

The evidence on increased high and medium clouds plus reducing low clouds since 2000 combined with increasing global albedo as reported by the Earthshine project has already been supplied.

I'm going to take a break now.

I find you and John Mason reasonable to deal with even if your interpretations of the available evidence do not match mine.

If reflection increases so that less energy enters the system and that reduced energy coming in lasts for longer than the increased length of time that energy stays in the system due to increased insulation then net cooling will ensue.

Reflected energy never gets into the system at all.

Increased insulation only delays for a little longer, and does not prevent, the loss of energy to space.

I'm sorry S.C.  It would seem you have not cared to watch any of the vids posted on the Jet issue?

To cut a long story short the jet is still poleward bound even in this recent sinuous incarnation.

Go back and watch the presentations of the evidence and those rather 'trippy' butterfly wing plots of the mean position of peaks and troughs of the Jet.

Just because one pattern is swamped by another doesn't mean that pattern is obliterated.

Think of it this way; the mid point of the jet is still trawling north. Be it a shallow curved line or a deep sinuous one the 'mid point' is still shifting north along with the tropic and the 10c oceanic isotherm.

---

I'm sorry S.C.  It would seem you have not cared to watch any of the vids posted on the Jet issue?

To cut a long story short the jet is still poleward bound even in this recent sinuous incarnation.

Go back and watch the presentations of the evidence and those rather 'trippy' butterfly wing plots of the mean position of peaks and troughs of the Jet.

Just because one pattern is swamped by another doesn't mean that pattern is obliterated.

Think of it this way; the mid point of the jet is still trawling north. Be it a shallow curved line or a deep sinuous one the 'mid point' is still shifting north along with the tropic and the 10c oceanic isotherm.

I'm sorry but we'll have to agree to disagree on this one GW, the jets are not moving poleward , end of story IMO and anyone else's who cares to dig a little deeper for themselves, something I always advocate on here due to peoples (including myself) inbuilt biases.

DR David Evans on the politics of 'AGW'
http://joannenova.com.au/2012/03/climate-coup-the-politics/ 

Hmmm..

If you oppose the regulating class, you will get called an “extremist”, a “nut”, a “conspiracy theorist”, “right wing”, and every variation of “stupid” and “ignorant”, irrespective of the merits of what you say. Say anything that mentions or might imply race and they will also call you a “racist”. Because they own the mainstream media, they will call you these names in the news and current affairs, newspapers, television, websites, books, movies, and in trendy conversation.

Figure 4: Oppose them, and they call you names. And they own the media. [Credits: Office for the Protection of Children and Youth, Nonprofithub]

Name-calling by members of the regulating class is so rife that it often replaces content entirely. Asked to explain why they believe something, they will often just indulge in name-calling, sometimes sophisticated or cleverly disguised name-calling, but often there will be no actual evidence, argument, or reasoning in their thicket of pejoratives.

Their name-calling frightens most people into submission most of the time: “Ooh, I don’t want to get called names, especially in public, so I won’t say anything.” A second important effect is to make their supporters arrogant and confident to the point of delusion, because they believe their critics really are stupid, ignorant kooks—after all, everyone trendy like them says so!

 

---

DR David Evans on the politics of 'AGW'
http://joannenova.com.au/2012/03/climate-coup-the-politics/ 

Hmmm..

If you oppose the regulating class, you will get called an “extremist”, a “nut”, a “conspiracy theorist”, “right wing”, and every variation of “stupid” and “ignorant”, irrespective of the merits of what you say. Say anything that mentions or might imply race and they will also call you a “racist”. Because they own the mainstream media, they will call you these names in the news and current affairs, newspapers, television, websites, books, movies, and in trendy conversation.

Figure 4: Oppose them, and they call you names. And they own the media. [Credits: Office for the Protection of Children and Youth, Nonprofithub]

Name-calling by members of the regulating class is so rife that it often replaces content entirely. Asked to explain why they believe something, they will often just indulge in name-calling, sometimes sophisticated or cleverly disguised name-calling, but often there will be no actual evidence, argument, or reasoning in their thicket of pejoratives.

Their name-calling frightens most people into submission most of the time: “Ooh, I don’t want to get called names, especially in public, so I won’t say anything.” A second important effect is to make their supporters arrogant and confident to the point of delusion, because they believe their critics really are stupid, ignorant kooks—after all, everyone trendy like them says so!

 

Good post four, we all know some people like that. No need to name and shame, as anyone who frequents this forum will see such antics deployed.

Bunker mentality SC. It means you lost.

---

Good post four, we all know some people like that. No need to name and shame, as anyone who frequents this forum will see such antics deployed.

a good point SC. As you say no need to name and shame but how many times have I (and others who share part or all of my view) been called (on here and elsewhere) "warmist(s)"'; described as "unable to think for myself" (and variations thereof)'; claimed to want to send us back to the stone age; leftist; communist; a conspirator; wanting a global gov; wanting to suppress freedom; wanting to suppress advancement of mankind''; alarmist; implications of being unreasonable (all the posts that refer to reasonable observers do actually imply there there are others who are unreasonable) etc.

Good post four, we all know some people like that. No need to name and shame, as anyone who frequents this forum will see such antics deployed.

a good point SC. As you say no need to name and shame but how many times have I (and others who share part or all of my view) been called (on here and elsewhere) "warmist(s)"'; described as "unable to think for myself" (and variations thereof)'; claimed to want to send us back to the stone age; leftist; communist; a conspirator; wanting a global gov; wanting to suppress freedom; wanting to suppress advancement of mankind''; alarmist; implications of being unreasonable (all the posts that refer to reasonable observers do actually imply there there are others who are unreasonable) etc.

Unfortunatley those responses are made after enduring abuse and bullying of one or two members on here for portraying a viewpoint different to the mainstream, of course two wrongs don't make a right though.

I think I pretty much avoided issuing comments such as those described but that didn't provide any protection did it ?

Whenever I have expressed judgemental opinions it has been aimed at institutions and not individuals.Sometimes I have snapped back when insulted.

Note the huge difference beteen Grey - Wolf and Gandalf.

I don't agree with much that either of them says but Grey - Wolf is a model of good manners whilst Gandalf fires off and escalates to a personal level at every expression of opinion that he disagrees with.

Ulric, meanwhile, goes straight to the personal every time (seems to think he is being witty) and says next to nothing about the science except on rare occasions.

Devonian seems ok part of the time but joins in whenever he sees another , such as Gandalf, firing off.

Essan swings about between reasonable and rather catty in about equal proportions.

Most signs of verbal aggression by sceptical contributors are defences rather than attacks.

I think I pretty much avoided issuing comments such as those described but that didn't provide any protection did it ?

Whenever I have expressed judgemental opinions it has been aimed at institutions and not individuals.Sometimes I have snapped back when insulted.

Note the huge difference beteen Grey - Wolf and Gandalf.

I don't agree with much that either of them says but Grey - Wolf is a model of good manners whilst Gandalf fires off and escalates to a personal level at every expression of opinion that he disagrees with.

Ulric, meanwhile, goes straight to the personal every time (seems to think he is being witty) and says next to nothing about the science except on rare occasions.

Devonian seems ok part of the time but joins in whenever he sees another , such as Gandalf, firing off.

Essan swings about between reasonable and rather catty in about equal proportions.

Most signs of verbal aggression by sceptical contributors are defences rather than attacks.

Well, if we're getting into character judgement (infact character assissination...).

Stephen Wilde plays the persecuted Gallileo very well.

 

---

"infact character assissination"

Not really.

 

You are, no doubt, all nice guys in your general lives. My comments are just small observations about quirks of behaviour on this blog with no wider implications.

Such things happen when opinions become conflated with emotions.

Being made aware of them may help clear the air.

"infact character assissination"

Not really.

 

You are, no doubt, all nice guys in your general lives. My comments are just small observations about quirks of behaviour on this blog with no wider implications.

Such things happen when opinions become conflated with emotions.

Being made aware of them may help clear the air.

Do you think some of your responses are emotional?

---

Some, but I tend not to attack individuals unless attacked first.

Of late I haven't even done that despite determined attempts at provocation.

The attacks get worst shortly after I post a bit of data that discredits an earlier comment but it isn't always the originator of that comment who launches the attack.

Without interference from Gandalf and Ulric I think there could be some constructive discussions here.

Four does snipe occasionally but not usually at personalities and SC is bending over backwards to be personable but like me he sometimes snaps back when attacked.

I think a fair analysis of the interactions here is long overdue.

Lets have a look at the article Four posted a link to on the previous page then shall we?

Who are the "Regulating Classes" exactly? Is it really OK to give the peer reviewed science and your own inexpert opinion equal weight? Is the whole thing a fraud and if it is, why would anyone concoct such a story? The whole thing just reeks of conspiracy theories and anarcho-capitalist froot loopery.

Somehow you expect us to discount the fact that we've just witnessed a catastrophic collapse of Arctic ice because you claim the MWP was warmer than now based on proxies you claim should be ignored. Who is pulling whose plonker here?

---

"anarcho-capitalist froot loopery"


Proved the point really haven't you, old chap.

I think Ulric has a fair idea of what is going on!

Thanks to SW for the kind words earlier in this exchange. I do try and 'do unto others' no matter the horrid things some folk would try and pigeon hole me as being?

My old Mum always used to chide us with "The truth will out" and I believe this is how things eventually pan out? Sadly public opinion (or the weight of it?) was our only chance of avoiding what we are now facing but the lies and filibustering put paid to those chances.

Sometime ,down the road, I fear a 'reckoning' on the folk who cost us our homes?

---

Thanks to SW for the kind words earlier in this exchange. I do try and 'do unto others' no matter the horrid things some folk would try and pigeon hole me as being?

My old Mum always used to chide us with "The truth will out" and I believe this is how things eventually pan out? Sadly public opinion (or the weight of it?) was our only chance of avoiding what we are now facing but the lies and filibustering put paid to those chances.

Sometime ,down the road, I fear a 'reckoning' on the folk who cost us our homes?

Sometime ,down the road, I fear a 'reckoning' on the folk who cost us our homes?

Its all part of a natural cycle.....

---