The climate and other earth systems are highly complex and difficult to model. Contingencies such as volcanic action and ENSO are very hard to include. The PDO was was only discovered in 1996. Three papers on the impact of the loss of Arctic sea ice appeared in 2012; they showed more winter storms.
But the models and reality agree on the trends, all 30 year datasets (the WMO classical period for climate) show increased warming.
Any qualms when business and industry and special interest groups start to take the reins?”
ATexasLibertarian on Jan 21, 2014 at 12:27:19
“A balance would be best in my opinion between these groups and the government (science is one thing I have no qualms about investing in). At the end of the day, someone has to fund science. I think it is also the responsibility of those performing the research to remain objective. Hopefully there is still room in our society for morals and integrity.”
“And what Mike Lockwood actually concluded in a recent paper:
"Using one of the most recent reconstructions of historic total solar irradiance, the likely reduction in the warming by 2100 is found to be between 0.06 and 0.1 K, a very small fraction of the projected anthropogenic warming. However, if past total solar irradiance variations are larger and climate models substantially underestimate the response to solar variations, then there is a potential for a reduction in solar activity to mitigate a small proportion of the future warming, a scenario we cannot totally rule out. While the Sun is not expected to provide substantial delays in the time to reach critical temperature thresholds, any small delays it might provide are likely to be greater for lower anthropogenic emissions scenarios than for higher-emissions scenarios.
"The money collected via this fee would be distributed to the public as a monthly “dividend” or “green check.”"”
virulentgod on Jan 20, 2014 at 16:48:43
“He's talking about distributing taxes collected from the rich to the poor so poor people can afford energy. Which is ridiculous and would never, ever happen, not while Barack Obama/George Bush is in charge. Now that we've established taxes on Americans will do nothing to help our global climate, what is your next suggestion? Car pooling?”
“Sure thing. A petition started by a publisher of civil defense materials, accompanied by a letter from a cigarette lobbyist, and a faux journal article co-authored by a couple of discredited deniers, and which can be signed by anyone who claims to have a science degree - including my wife who is pharmacist.
Or the almost 200 science academies world-wide that endorse AGW findings.”
ctgeorgia on Jan 20, 2014 at 16:40:49
“Here are 1,000 International Scientists that have gone on the record disagreeing with the AGW theory. Their names, affiliations, and quotes included in a 300+ page report. many participated in the IPCC process. Of course, you will poo-poo the report without reading any of it b/c it was produced by the minority of the committee. http://cfact.org/pdf/2010_Senate_Minority_Report.pdf
I am still waiting for your list of names!”
"The majority of models predict that ENSO-neutral (Niño-3.4 index between -0.5oC and 0.5oC) will persist into the Northern Hemisphere summer 2014. While current forecast probabilities are still greatest for ENSO-neutral during summer, there is an increasing chance for the development of El Niño. The consensus forecast is for ENSO-neutral to continue into the Northern Hemisphere summer 2014"
“A carbon tax is simply a means of putting a cost on excess CO2. Any company that has waste product in a liquid or solid form has to pay to have it properly disposed. Are invisible gases exempt just because we cannot see them i the air?
A carbon tax is collected from fossil-fuel companies upon the first sale at the mine, wellhead or port of entry.
The money collected via this fee would be distributed to the public as a monthly “dividend” or “green check.” Distributing all of the revenue equitably to households will ensure that families can afford the energy they need during the transition to a clean energy future, and it should help win public support for a rising carbon fee.
There is no government revenue and no corporate profit.
Check out the carbon tax in British Columbia. It is revue neutral.
“So, in other words, the rich make less money, and they are okay with that? They don't pass this new tax onto the consumer? Like they do with every tax levied against them? How have you guys managed to get the rich to share some of their fortune with the little people?”
“I will give you a hint. If you are going to post a link to Svensmark, do not post a page from the Desmogblog climate disinformation site, "An extensive database of individuals involved in the global warming denial industry." (http://www.desmogblog.com/global-warming-denier-database)