@ voxUnius, Tuesday, 5 July 2011 5:29:53 p.m.

With all due respect vox, it is more complicated than that.

There are many good studies on the subject, this one is particularly good and is recent (check-out the references):

http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/res/div/ocp/pub/seager/Seager_Naik_Vecchi_2010.pdf

Of particular interest is part 8, consideration of the Clausius–Clapeyron relation.

.

juliasnutter

>> Is this what you want us to read on the AGW supporting and your referenced site? <<

Actually, I gave the precise link, here it is again:

http://bravenewclimate.com/2011/06/24/clearing-up-the-climate-debate/

Please feel free to comment there.

What has Keiran's comment in 2008 got to do with the above link - are you Keiran?

To Chris Golis. Precisely the point made by Dr David Evans who was on the Government's Greenhouse Advisory Committee. When upper atmospheric temperatures showed no hotspot above the tropics he changed from a warmist to a sceptic. He realised that temperature measurements taken at urban hotspots next to air conditioners or on concrete tarmacs at airports were fraudulently depicting rising global temperatures. In fact there has been no increase in upper atmospheric temperatures since 1998 while atmospheric carbon dioxide levels were increasing. He is to be commended for his courage. Most scientists on the Government's global warming gravy train are more concerned with their careers and salaries than objective science.I wonder how convinced the average Brit is that the planet is warming after experiencing their coldest winter in a century.