The dynamics of atmospheric CO2 is very difficult to analyze because of its role in the biosphere. Increases in CO2 stimulates growth in vegetation which results in a natural carbon sequestration mechanism. The effect of this is to slow the rate of increase in atmospheric CO2. However, the details of this process are poorly understood. This is primarily due to the fact that there are hundreds of thousands of species of flora each with its own unique response to the availability of carbon. Modeling this response array and factoring it into a global climate model is an enormous task. Models of the system tend to be mathematically chaotic in that even small changes in the input parameters result in wildly differing outcomes. Unfortunately, this opens the door to selection strategies that are based as much on ideology as on the scientific method. Humans have a natural desire to simplify the complex even if the results veer away from objective reality. The consequences of this is the illusion of understanding. The problem is that it is much easier to believe something than to understand it.

So first they got rid of the Medieval warm period so that they could claim it was the hottest in recorded history and not have to deal with those pesky historical facts.

Then when the slope of the curve didn't match their predictions, they lowered the temperature in the early part of the 20th century to get the curve to slope up more.

Now that people are making the case that their grand tax and wealth transfer scheme isn't enough to fix the climate so we should just spend the money on fixing any affects of whatever happens, they are moving the goal posts closer so that their preferred solution might actually work.

Why is anyone still listening to them?

My dangerous dino mind just imagined Al Gore squeezing his eyes shut, covering his ears and repeatedly screaming, "I can't hear you! I can't hear you! La-la-la! La-la-la!"

You can't have a crisis and command limitless tax dollars and political support with actual co2 numbers.

It irritates me to continually hear about the "97%". That number of supposed scientific adherents is as bogus as the human-caused climate change fiction. The number came from a poll that was sent to roughly a thousand scientists who published peer reviewed papers about climate activity. Only 300 had published papers analyzing possible causes, and of those only 79 responded, with one not ready to blame it all on humans. So the authors of the poll extrapolated from the opinions of 79 to imply that 97% of all the 34,000 or so scientists with some form of connection with climate study support the notion that climate change is entirely due to human activity. BS!

It is interesting how this is spun in the Nature Geoscience paper. The official model predicts 1.5 deg C increase with a 615 gigaton of carbon emitted since 1870. That level of carbon would be reached in just 7 years from now and we should have the warming of 2100. But the earth is not warming that much, now with their model rather than 70 more gigaton of carbon we need ~200 more to reach that 1.5C . In other words they went "Oh s**t the model is not working and in 7 years we'll look like fools, we better get a new one now!" But since the effect of carbon emission is lower, to lower the warming to less than 1.5C we need to cut carbon emissions even more, because the earth is still warming at the same rate! Finding the real responsible of warming would be a better choice.

Seems it is atmospheric pressure that determines planet temperatures and not the make up of that atmosphere.
The moon gets just as much and maybe even more sunlight than earth, yet it's 90 degrees C cooler than that of earth...why?...no atmosphere.

http://www.wnd.com/2017/07/study-blow...

This whole global warming scientific hoax goes back so many years. From the day the meters were put in place to record so-called warming, their placement was set to skew the results to show it was hot, really hot - esp. if they are in enclose brick NYC courtyards or where yet plane emissions blast them. The whole thing was a control device, to get people to do what leaders wanted. Who let Gorby into US schools with his Green agenda and false ideas, all while still holding his Communist Party Car politicians and "educators". Who planned Earth Day to fall on Vald. Lenin's birthday, some one who wanted to laugh at the stupid US citizens. Even the UN says they no longer care if global warming is true, as long as people think it is, and they can control them. Climate change is even more ridiculous - climate has always changed, luckily. CO2 warriors were doing one thing - going along to assure continued grant money as a reward. They persisted in saying electric engines were a salvation, even though the carbon footprints of all those batteries, is worse than conventional. They have to know that thy power is not there to plug in millions of battery cars every night, they can barely meet the needs of everyday life now. Of course they know, but hope we don't so they can control us. Unlike AlGore, I actually took science in college, what a moron he is, except when he goes to the bank with his bogus carbon credit money. Why is manmade climate control, by multiple counties, like our two HAARP installaotins never discussed. Because it does not lead to control of the population, and they don't want us to know how much we are paying to manipulate the ionosphere and jet streams.

The earth will do what it wants to do. Its just too big to be affected in any substantial way by human activity.

A truly stunning development!

GWPF Newsletter 27/09/17
Climate Change Predictions: What Went Wrong? http://mailchi.mp/thegwpf.org/climate...