Thanks Bazz

Hmmm, the American Thinker? One could be forgiven for thinking *oxymoron* - just kidding :)

As to 'hide the decline', yep. See my comment here;

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=9806#157549

Much more interested in your 2nd link. Fwiw, I give the IPCC some slack here - 'their' projected (and dated) scenarios (SRES) have always been based on what the econometricians/economists model - not the science of climate change, far from it in fact. And I have yet to see economists get their modeling right.

By the time AR5 comes out, the scientists (at least) will have more resolution (and computing power) for regional climate projections (and hopefully the bean-counters will learn from their past, ummm - excursions to all ends of the spectrum). The only problem here is that shorter term projections (signals) are swamped by noise - i.e. separating the weather from the climate ... important for land use planning, for example.

Have fun with the raw data, just be aware that every TD&H will think they are the experts (they do anyway, I guess) not realising that the raw data is just that - ergo, how will they know how and when to calibrate/adjust for the gradual loss in height of a satellite, or when to dismiss spurious numbers from an Argo float, for example?

Almost forgot, it's not all just about GHG emissions from fossil fuels, Bazz. Read up on the cement manufacturing process, or poor land use management. Energy from fossil hydrocarbons is only one side of a many sided conundrum.

Q&A,
Well I don't know how they make cement, but they use a lot of
energy, so what else could it be other than electricity ?
My son's partner is a school teacher and a hot to trot warmer.
She was most upset when I said, not to worry it will all die away as
the fuel burning declines and you can worry about what you are going
to put in your cars tank. Either that or ride a bike to work.

The data I down loaded is wx stations around the UK.
It will be an interesting exercise.

CaCO3 + heat -> CaO + CO2

About 900 kg of gas emitted for every 1000 kg of cement produced.

And your right about the energy required in the process itself - that's extra.

Peak hydrocarbons maybe, but there’s a lota stuff in those them tar sands and oil shales (just ask Canada).

Besides, all depends on what price we’re prepared to pay to extract it. And the way the Arctic is going, even now the big boys are positioning themselves for exploration and drilling rights.

I can’t help but feel we humans have an innate capacity to stuff things up, no matter how hard we try not to. But, we must keep trying – not to stuff things up, that is.

Here I am at this ungodly hour. Been listening to dopey politicians
talking about population up to 38 Million.

Here is a link to a article about who leaked the emails.
It appears, and with my limited Linux knowledge, it seems pretty
correct that they were not hacked but leaked.

http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/FOIA_Leaked/

Q&A Re the Artic, Colin Campbell says that they won;t find much there
as the continental drift will not have moved much oil up there.
The net return on the shale is very poor and even the shale gas has
a short lifetime due to the difficulty in getting it out of tight
porous rock. The pressure falls off fast and quite quickly becomes
too slow to be worthwhile. At least that is what I have read.
No expert on these things, just read a fair bit as I have an interest
in a gas company.

You see, you are all feeling guilty for stuffing up the world, am I right? You didn't do it deliberately, you just happened to be the one in a gazillion sperm to be born. But you feel guilty.....

Politicians and the world bank want us to feel guilty because we are ordinary people living an ordinary life, so we must pay...

They won't, but we will, and so will our kids and our grand kids. They will not even feel the bite.

The world will turn and mother nature will take care of the generations to come whether they are our off spring or another species altogether in, give or a take, a few thousand years. We can't change it.

Good grief, what are we thinking, trusting politicians who only want more tax dollars, or scientific researchers being paid by them?

We, all of us, are finite in the scheme of things. Why do some human beings believe we can change that? Probably because we are the one species that can think logically and problem solve; but trying to solve the unsolvable problems will be our downfall.

In the scheme of things we are ants...are ants guilty of polluting the world with CO2, bet they produce some, but they don't feel guilty. Look outside the square people.