Please remember this Thomas, before you point us/me to some web page.

Preach it, brother.

Just checked Thomas. I have 13 pages of Science of Doom bookmarked under ‘Climate Science’ – ‘Heat and Ocean’ for ready reference. They’ve been there since 2010ish.

And BTW, my ‘Climate Science’ folder has 13 categories. Here’s some of what is in 4 of those:-

‘Heat and Ocean’ sub-folder alone has 172 pages in total bookmarked

‘AGW Busted’ sub-folder has 138 pages.

‘Models’ sub-folder has 11 sub-sub-folders, here’s 5 of them: ‘Codes’ has 17 pages, ‘NCAR’ has 29 pages, ‘NASA’ has 2 sub-sub-sub-folders – ‘GISS’ and ‘GSFC’, GISS has 17 pages. ‘Models Articles’ sub-folder has 179 pages. ‘WCRP’ sub-folder has 18 pages including the RCP Database.

‘Water Vapour’ sub-folder has 67 articles.

That’s just a sample of what was left after I’ve culled a whole bunch. In addition I have access to probably well over 1000 articles/links/papers etc in CCG ‘Open Threads’, just one of which is:-

’1100+ Peer-Reviewed Papers Supporting Skeptic Arguments Against ACC/AGW Alarm’

http://www.populartechnology.net/2009/10/peer-reviewed-papers-supporting.html

The ‘Open Threads’ index I use most, and which I compiled along with many of the ‘Thread’ category headers (“Thread” is me), is filed in ‘Climate’, ‘Disproving AGW’ (bookmarked of course). There are 33 categories and in addition to the index at the top-of-page bar you can find that index here:-

http://www.climateconversation.wordshine.co.nz/open-threads/climate/disproving-agw/#comment-26342

Please remember this Thomas, before you point us/me to some web page.

As Richard Feynman suggested, Cargo Cult Science

Thanks anyway, read all that a few years ago.

But here’s an idea for you Thomas. Why don’t you access the DLR databases that SoD links to for his examples of DLR graphs e.g. Darwin. Try to find any evidence at all that DLR has been rising anywhere in the world at any location where observations have been made for many years now that is commensurate in sign and magnitude with CO2 forcing?

Good luck with that Thomas.

Or, but preferably in addition to the above, you could present some observational peer-reviewed scientific literature. I suggest Gero and Turner (Great Plains USA), Francis and Hunter (Arctic/Barrow area), Wild et al (GEWEX network), Wu et al (I think they are – SURFRAD network), and a long-term Antarctic study for which I can’t recall the authors off-hand.

Good luck with that too.

Hmm….

He’s trying to pretend that the big red spot in the middle of the diagram isn’t really there after all.

The simple fact is that stratospheric cooling can be caused by CO2 and ozone. Is there more CO2 up there? Yes. Big deal. The whole point about the hot spot is that it is a necessary outcome of water vapour feedback. As CO2 increases the temperature, it causes a water vapour increase in the atmosphere over the tropics and more GHG warming. Simple.

So no hot spot implies water vapour feedback is zero. Which implies CS is as low as the sceptics have been saying for years. Doubling of CO2 concentration will produce at most 1.2°C increase.

Face it, the science is telling us the sceptics have been right all along, and the alarmists were wrong – we aren’t all going to fry.