Goofball_star_dot_etal wrote:
On Thu, 31 May 2007 18:37:52 -0400, Jeff wrote:

* Goofball_star_dot_etal wrote, On 5/31/2007 4:28 PM:
...
Fact? Really? Its been proven without a doubt that man is the reason for
increased CO2 levels? That's in question. And its even more in question
as to whether CO2 is the cause of the result of GW. So your statement is
not founded in FACT, but rather in CONJECTURE.

According to you...

Show the numbers.
Fig2.3 etc.
http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/Report/AR4WG1_Pub_Ch02.pdf

The AR4 just doesn't cut it. They are only willing to say that "since
1750, it is extremely likely that humans have exerted a substantial
warming influence on climate" and "For the period 1950 to 2005, it is
exceptionally unlikely that the combined natural RF (solar irradiance
plus volcanic aerosol) has had a warming influence comparable to that
of the combined anthropogenic RF."

This is a far cry from the 100% certainty that Cess is looking for.
Clearly, it isn't worth doing anything if its only "extremely likely"
that we have a problem. And since the scientists can only say its
"exceptionally unlikely" that natural influences equal the human
influence, that leaves a huge possibility that the warming was really
caused by a volcano that we didn't notice.

And obviously, if Global Warming was real, the President Bush would be
calling for setting goals on greenhouse gas emissions. Until that day
comes, nobody has anything to worry about.

I don't think the 10,000,000,000 odd tons of carbon/year are in much
doubt at all, or the levels of atmospheric CO2 or even the 1.2 W/m2
CO2 radiative forcing (fig2). The doubt is mainly in the
clouds/aerosol contribution and the sensitivity of temperature to
radiative forcing. Just a big coincidence, I suppose, that it all
seems to fit..


If not otherwise so widely disputed, the researchers' guess might be a
little more credible.