Thanks luci, I have seen the Stauning effort.

This paper states that the temperature pause is a product of a reduced TSI which masks the real temperature increase due to AGW.

Can we stop and think about this? Stauning says CO2 caused temperature rise is continuing but the measured temperature is falling due to a reduced TSI!

So the cooling [!] effect of the reduced TSI negates completely the heating effect of CO2.

Seriously?

This takes me back to Foster and Rahmstorf paper:

http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/6/4/044022

Among other natural confounding factors F&R removed TSI and found a 'pure' AGW temperature signal of 0.014 to 0.018 K yr−1.

The nonsense of this is that this 'pure' signal was constant from 1979 but during this time CO2 was increasing exponentially as it still is.

This means that for temperature to be flat and even cooling the natural warming factors including TSI must be also DECREASING exponentially!

TSI is not decreasing exponentially and this theory about TSI, along with Trenberth's and England's winds and Santer's volcanoes and aerosols as explanations for the decline in temperature, is contradicted.

The Climate Change Authority was a tax payer funded cheer squad for Juliar's carbon tax, to try and compensate for Juliar being such a lying and deceitful weasel in bringing it in after guaranteeing that she wouldn't before the election.

Luciferase

Is that your idea of proving the rational basis for policy action? (Your dream of being a dictator is all its proving.)

But seriously, are you suggesting that what you have just written is a basis for policy action?

Search my form on this topic on OLO, JKJ.

Why assume a 2 degree rise when we're headed into unchartered territory well beyond that? We either agitate for mitigative action on AGW or just enjoy the ride towards oblivion as best we can.

I have a policy on how to avoid future problems by attacking their source, not on how to rearrange the deck-chairs as the ship goes down under the policy settings of denialist governments you support.

Lucifer you really are off the air. You refer to Realists as deniers. There is no science, on the AGW side, to deny. Despite the great expenditure of time and money, no measurable effect on climate by human emissions has been scientifically demonstrated. You want human emissions curtailed. The planet is not warming. There has been no warming for 17 years, and prior to that a very moderate warming of about one half of a degree, as we came out of the mini Ice Age.

There is no warming which requires attention, and what warming there has been was not caused by human emissions.

Global warming has stopped, despite the increase in CO2. The fraud backers say that global warming has “paused”. It has stopped, and has remained stopped for 17 years.

The planet’s temperature trend is down. The earth is cooling over the long term. The only warming trends have been short term, and irrelevant to the long term.

Have a go at writing something rational, Lucifer. You never know until you try, whether you are too far gone to do so.

"I have a policy on how to avoid future problems by attacking their source,"

A pity that 7 billion people regard their liberty and property as more likely to satisfy their needs, than your wannabe dictatorial self-opinionated belief that you know better than everyone else in the world put together.

Hint: your gods-eye view is false.