SteeleRedux,

Arctic sea ice volume :-
http://haveland.com/share/arctic-death-spiral.png

Dear ant

Are you telling me this article says the initial temp rise followed an increase in co2.

If you are either the article contradicts it self, your comprehension abilities are retarded or you cannot accept the truth even when empherical evidence (not modelling ) presented by people you think support warming actually contradicts all the terrorists modelling.

Ant where ever you are no amount of backsliding or obsfaction can change the statements in your cited authority that the rise in temp was followed by a rise in co2 and that the initial heat rise was caused by solar and planet influences.

Now go back to the question I first asked and ask yourself why you are fooling yourself.

Leo, remember Andrew Bolt and Tuvalu.
No doubt you did not look at the site I provided on another thread where Monckton’s arguments were shredded.
David Bellamy, a climate change denier has argued that glaciers are increasing in size, all the evidence points to him being completely wrong. Is he committing fraud Leo in making statements that can be objectively shown to be wrong?
You keep suggesting fraud is taking place based on “climategate”, where stupid politics got in the way of proper science. A few scientists were involved with this debacle. Monckton and Watts have been caught out making false claims, by your logic Leo they are committing fraud. Are ice sheets, temperature in the Arctic region, and glaciers showing fraud Leo, they do are not behaving like deniers suggest they should?
The thing is Leo, that there is a truck load of papers supporting climate change; in comparison there are only a handful of papers that deny anthroprogenic climate change. Your comment about supporting fraud is really quite farcical.

Has it occurred to you that a number of climate scientists are Christians, Professor Hayloe being one.

“But in the fall of 2009, Hayhoe and her husband, Andrew Farley, published a book titled A Climate for Change: Global Warming Facts for Faith-Based Decisions, and a fact she’d always kept out of her professional life was suddenly very public. Hayhoe and Farley are evangelical Christians, and Farley, an associate professor of applied linguistics at Texas Tech, is also the pastor of a local church.”
Strange people to be committing fraud, Leo.

http://www.climatecentral.org/news/for-katharine-hayhoe-climate-change-not-a-leap-of-faith/

Professor Hayhoe features in the film Years of Living Dangerously

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/apr/11/hollywood-celebrities-climate-change-years-of-living-dangerously

imajulianutter, there are any number of references to John Tyndall, here is one

http://www.siliconrepublic.com/clean-tech/item/23757-irish-scientist-john-tyndal

It is interesting that in 1938; Guy Callender, stated that global temperatures were rising due to CO2 levels increasing. Most scientists didn’t agree with that view at the time. It was in the 1960s that Charles Keeling began to measure CO2 levels from Hawaii. You quibble about a few sentences, but the association between CO2 and temperature was stated.

Further grist for the mill:
http://sciences.blogs.liberation.fr/files/shakun-et-al.pdf
http://www.scilogs.com/from_the_lab_bench/old-news-for-carbon-dioxide-new-threats-for-climate-change/

Don,
Algae farming is what we need to be doing for numerous reason!
The very first of which is peak oil!
The second is because the production is endlessly sustainable!
It can be grown in salt water, as salty as sea water; in fact, I believe the bio-diesel farms in our northwest, are doing just that.
We don't need arable land per se, given the best production is virtually hydroponic, and just doesn't need arable land.
Some types are up to 60% oil.
The oil can be harvested as a ready to use product, by filtering out some of the live material, then sun drying it, followed by a very rudimentary crushing.
The ex-crush material may be suitable as very high protein fodder, or eminently suitable, as source material for ethanol production.
Currently, ethanol production creates an energy debt; however, if it relied exclusively on waste, that would no longer be the case!
Algae absorb around 2.5 times their body-weight in Co2, and under optimized conditions, double that and their oil production capacity every 24 hours!
If they so good, why isn't everyone doing it?
Well, maybe they're just too dumb; or, it could take a decade, if one starts from a low production base, just to grow enough seed material, to support the required economies of scale!
That then includes mandatory government involvement and outlays, to simply establish/support an indigenous industry.
What better use for the remaining save the Murray money?
Some might even argue, if we were not lead by self serving fools/responsibility duck shovers, we would already have and be benefiting from this industry, instead of importing expensive foreign oil, at a cost of around 26 and rising, annual billions.
A number that could be more than halved, if we just had the smarts to grow specific oil rich algae here!
The yanks who have a huge head start, prefer our native algae!
Why don't we?
Rhrosty.

Thanks Luciferase for your references, deniers mostly don't read references I have found.
The first provides Dr Shakun's study; the second one provides information through an interview process about his study. Eighty studies from different parts of the planet were analysed by Dr. Jeremy Shakun and his team.
Dr Shakun stated “Global temperatures are following CO2.” There is no ambiguity in that statement; indicated by the studies he used (80).

An article in Nature describing the same study stated: "The team found that CO2 levels were more important than any of these factors in driving warming." There is no ambiguity there either, they had looked for factors other than CO2.

http://www.nature.com/news/how-carbon-dioxide-melted-the-world-1.10393

Deniers might like to explain why climate change is happening so quickly in the Arctic region.
They might like to explain why 16 kilometers of glacier has been lost from one glacier in Greenland in one year is of no concern.
They might like to suggest why "ice streams" are of no importance. They might like to explain why ranges in temperatures of up to 40 degrees C in particular areas is of no concern.
They might like to explain why pathogens in water are of no concern to the Inuit of Northern Canada brought about by warmer conditions.
They might like to explain why average temperatures being significantly higher is of no concern.
They might like to explain why inducing feedback systems is of no concern.
They might like to explain why the climate being awry in the Arctic area is of no concern.
They might like to explain why the death spiral figure referenced by Poirot is of no concern.
They might like to explain why stormy weather in the Arctic region is now a worry.
They might like to explain why warming perma frost is nothing to be worried about.
They might like to explain why glaciers retreating in the Himalaya is of no concern.
These events have slowly been incrementally developing over decades.