That's not science, its religion mhaze,

Well I walk about on the surface of the earth without flying off into space by reason of a force called gravity.

The Sun comes up each day in the east and sets in the west.

The tide comes in every day at slightly less than 12 hour intervals.

Is that religion?

If the Arctic ice is getting less each year till it eventually disappears, is that religion?

Warmair, +ve feedbacks ie:

“The top 700 meters of the ocean is accumulating heat and surface sea surface temperatures are rising.”

SST since 2003 when the ARGO floats and accurate measurement was introduced:

http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadsst2gl/from:2003/trend

OHC to 700 meters:

http://bobtisdale.wordpress.com/2012/10/13/wheres-the-anthropogenic-global-warming-signal-in-the-nodc-ocean-heat-content-data-0-700meters/

“The sea level is rising and shows signs of accelerating.”

http://oi56.tinypic.com/9u5jis.jpg

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_nOY5jaKJXHM/S3xTTpWSGjI/AAAAAAAAAyk/lWAqvOnb72Q/s1600/Fullscreen%2Bcapture%2B2172010%2B122234%2BPM.jpg

http://www.ocean-sci-discuss.net/6/31/2009/osd-6-31-2009.html

“Overnight temperatures have risen faster than than daily maximums”

DTR did not change between 1979 and 2004; even the IPCC in AR4 shows that:

http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/figure-3-2.html

The significance of that is that 1979 was the beginning of the satellite temperature data which is the most accurate, and the most accurate temperature does not support DTR.

“The Arctic is melting at a rapid rate which has increased dramatically since the 1990s
10,000 plus glaciers are melting and in rapid retreat.
The high latitudes are warming much faster than elsewhere”

Alarmist hogwash.

More hogwash from Bugs; a break was not introduced; do you even know how a Chow works? The model is not forced to fit or introduce a break anywhere; if there were not statistically significant breaks the R2 of the slopes before and after the break would not be ‘significant’! This does not make sense:

“It you put the break just before a large anomaly, then that would certainly give you a better R2, regardless of any underlying trends.”

The anomaly is the point! The break is the anomaly and shows the error of the typical AGW upward temperature trend.

Believe what you want; that is what the thread is about: the belief of AGW supporters.

And poor old Poirot goes to all the trouble of putting up her noughts and crosses, supposedly showing how many ‘good’ scientist there are compared to the ‘bad’ scientists who aren’t part of the AGW consensus; this 97% figure of course, is based on one of the worse papers ever written [excluding Lewandowsky] by Doran and Zimmerman which is critiqued here:

http://theclimatescepticsparty.blogspot.com.au/2012/03/consensus-myth-97-of-nothing.html

"The Consensus Myth: 97% of Nothing" by Anthony Cox

....brought to you by the NO CARBON TAX Climate Skeptics Party.

(highly entertaining watching the lawyer lecturing the scientist on the science)

Thanks cohenKnight

97% of 79 'scientists' sucking on the public teat agree that global warming is happening..... Well, blow me down!

"The challenge for warmers is not your science,". Sorry Spindoc, beg to differ, it IS their science, it has ALWAYS been their science. All the rest of the rhetoric is because the science does not stand up.

Their 'A' team is the greatest argument supporting those that question. Do we put Doran and Zimmerman in the A team, what about the towering genius that recons I must also believe the moon landing was fake, or the charming character opining that we who question should suffer the death penalty.

Common guys, give us a full thoated defence of these characters.

Poirot,

Ah, the old 97%. A master stoke of retreat. When all your science has failed to get any traction you offer this?

“This number stems from a 2009 online survey of 10,257 earth scientists, conducted by two researchers at the University of Illinois. The survey results must have deeply disappointed the researchers (just 3146, or 30.7%, answered the two questions on the survey) – in the end, they chose to highlight the views of a subgroup of just 77 scientists, 75 of whom thought humans contributed to climate change. The ratio 75/77 produces the 97% figure that pundits now tout”.

And you wonder why your bovine excrement cheating no longer works? Even if it were true, these 97% of scientists have still failed you, all these scientists and all their science cannot recover what has been lost.

If all of your science has failed to sustain momentum with the institutions, bodies, organisations and governments that once drove the movement. Why are they all retreating or abandoning your science? The sheer might of these bodies, as listed below, cannot get your dead cat to bounce.

UN FCCC, the IPCC, the EU, UN and Copenhagen CO2 trading markets, Deutche Bank, NGO’s, Canada, Japan, Germany, USA, Russia, Eastern Europe, France, UK, China, India, the entire EU, the US EPA, Phil Jones CRU, Michael Mann Philadelphia State Uni., the ABC, Fairfax and the BBC?

Not only has momentum been lost, the entire movement is approaching inertia globally.

The only people left with anything to say are those clinging to the last vestiges of very science that has failed you. If it is not good enough or credible enough for your own global movement, what good is it to YOU let alone us?

What is it Poirot that you just don’t get?

It does not surprise me that you quote the 97%, it telegraph’s to every reader that this is all you have left. It does surprise me however, that you failed to ask questions about some of the inclusions on my list?

Tells us about 28Gate or why I might mention Deutche Bank

Not all that long ago the medical world believed almost to a man, that stomach ulcers were caused by excessive stomach acids. Two WA medical researchers, thought something else could be implicated, and set out to prove their hypotheses; that bacteria caused stomach ulcers, and won a Noble prize in the process.
Albeit they were heckled and attacked from dawn to dusk by all manner of adversaries, many of who were allegedly "doctors/scientists"; or by others who possibly had a vested interest in the condition being caused by excess stomach acid, which probably had until then, earned them quintillions?
Many of our posters here seem to have a vested interest in the status quo? And like all deniers, can seem to get extremely personal or incredibly dismissive!
Why?
Well, history repeating itself; and or, nobody likes to have their belief system challenged, but particularly, if that challenge also includes some personal hip pocket pain?
For decades, the tobacco industry employed cooperative "specialists", to support a view that tobacco was relatively benign or harmless!
And asbestos miners continued to sell their pernicious products, even years after the science was in and they knew that it was a veritable death sentence for almost all who were exposed to it.
The four trillion dollars plus per, fossil fuel industry is exploring ways to sequester "HARMLESS" carbon, as are many governments, and hundreds of millions are being poured into this research!
This, in spite of the fact that every boy and his dog knows that algae absorb 2.5 times their bodyweight in Co2, and under optimised conditions, double that bodyweight/absorption capacity every 24 hours! And some algae is up to 60% oil!
Now we are supposed to be the smart species?
So why don't we agree to disagree, and crack on with what ought to be done, as if climate change were real and needs mitigation, that by the way, is chock full of wealth and job creation opportunities; and much cheaper energy products!
Rhrosty.