I actually don't have the time to read all 1,550,000 papers on the topic that you kindly pointed out for me, qanda.

I was hoping you could point me towards a form of peer-reviewed, science-based executive summary.

Is there one?

If there isn't, we are going to have to believe the politicians, or the Greens, or the oil industry, or the carbon trading industry.

Why should we have to choose?

That is right qanda, you have 5 scientists put their name to AGW being “very likely”.

Originally it was seven, but two had a rethink, and withdrew their support. No scientist supports the assertion that there is scientific proof of AGW.

31.487 scientists have signed a petition about the absence of scientific evidence that human release of gases will cause catastrophic warming, and about the scientific evidence of the benefits of CO2 in the atmosphere.

Why do you refer us to AR4? The question was where, is there a peer reviewed study, by reputable scientists, setting out a scientific basis for the assertion of AGW.

It is not in AR4. Just answer the question qanda, about where there is such a study.

The simple answer is nowhere, because it does not exist. Stop taking up space with non-answers.

What does “challenges his question” mean, qanda? The question challenges you, to give a straight and honest answer, which appears to be beyond your capacity.

What is “discounts his assertion” supposed to convey? My assertion is that you have never answered the question. That is a simple fact, and is not discounted in any way. It is fully confirmed by the unresponsive nonsense in your post.

Pericles:

"I was hoping you could point me towards a form of peer-reviewed, science-based executive summary.

Is there one?"

I like how you wrote that so straight, very droll Pericles

“The date of this article is 10 March 2010, and as at 22 March, publication of the refutation by McLean et al was being stalled by the Journal which ultimately published it. The window of opportunity to use this nonsense closed a long time ago. You are as usual, well behind the pack, Protagoras, and completely out of date.”

“Completely out of date?” March 2010? Errr….Well I’ve had a big day Leo Lane. Do you mean that McLean has published a refutation in the Journal of Geophysical Research to Foster’s refutation of McLean et al? Where is the link? And why are you so impressed when Carter and de Freitas (and his brother) are well known for their shenanigans and wear the leper’s bell and have no standing in the climate science community?

Professor Stephan Lewandowsky reminds us that “Mr McLean’s published affiliation is given as “Applied Science Consultants” in Croydon Victoria. This entity does not have a web page. This entity does not have a recorded phone number. This entity does not have an ABN and it is not registered as a business in Victoria.

”The author's home page can eventually be traced to Switzerland, where it identifies J D McLean as a "computer consultant and occasional travel photographer.

"According to the Australian National Library, no J D McLean has ever submitted a thesis for a research degree at any institution in Australia, for any program in any discipline.”

Tsk tsk Leo Lane - McLean has zero credentials and you’ve scraped the bottom of the barrel, haven’t you? Amidst your reams of jabberwocky and ad hominem, is that the best you can come up with?

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2858332.htm

In view of your lack of integrity I now believe that the proper thing for you to do is to prove to readers that the current anthropogenic carbon perturbations have no influence on climate. Please provide credible links to support your hypothesis as I have done.

Protagoras, Protagoras, like a 5 year old caught with paint all over his hands, you still insist, 'I didn't do it!'

Ahem ... 'Paleontology points to climate change without human influence — the Permo-Triassic extinction (great warming) ...' - Posted by Protagoras, Saturday, 19 June 2010 6:29:59 PM.

Not 'possibly due to great warming', no hint that there may be competing hypotheses, simply a straight assertion that 'great warming' was the culprit in the Permo-Triassic extinction.

Oh, and I know all about 'The Great Dying': I have several rather nice fossils I've personally collected from that era. My local museum also has a very good permanent exhibit entitled 'The Great Dying'; it's certainly not called, nor does it mention, 'the great warming' - I think you might be confusing that with a 'Land Before Time' video you watched, once. ;)

Still, I'll grant you that you're always amusing, so do keep it up!

“Paleontology points to climate change without human influence — the Permo-Triassic extinction **(great warming) — the Paleocene Thermal Maximum (sudden warming) and succeeding Early Eocene Thermal Maximum —the gradual Oligo-Miocene cooling — the gradual coolings and sudden warmings of the Pleistocene including the associated impacts of volcanism.” (Protagoras)

Excerpt from “Climate and the evolution of Earth's terrestrial biota” Prof. Bruce Tiffney:

“we will touch on some high points of climate change — the Permo-Triassic extinction ** (great warming) — the Paleocene Thermal Maximum (sudden warming) and succeeding Early Eocene Thermal Maximum — The gradual Oligo-Miocene cooling — and if time permits the gradual coolings and sudden warmings of the Pleistocene. Recommended resources”

http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/about/shortcourses/shortcourse08.php

Permian Triassic = great dying, great warming, elevated CO2 emissions - all appropriate. Why the anal retentiveness Clownfish? Had trouble during your potty training years? There is a strong suspicion though that you’re a creationist attached to the papacy of propaganda, whose favorite sport is speaking in tongues, stringing together quotations, carefully taking them out of context and attributing quotes to the wrong person to show that nothing is really established or agreed upon among climate scientists or evolutionists.

And what has your intellectual contribution been to 'Global warming deniers and their proven strategy of doubt?' The usual shitstorm of absurdities.