Poirot,

You really can't get past the idea that any current warming must be man-made can you?
OK, so when there was higher temps in the earlier Holocene, the sea levels were higher. So what? If the warming is natural, there's really bugger all we can do to prevent it so we'd just have to adapt to the higher levels.

Its not a question of saying "it's all happened before, so no probs.....". But it is a question of saying it happened before we started burning fossil fuels, was therefore natural and is probably natural now. So recognise that there may be problems with the warming and stop blowing money on fruitless efforts to stop it and start spending money on mitigation. that is if you believe the warming will continue, which I don't.

BTW, we were talking about Arctic sea-ice melting. How much sea level rise do you think will occur if all the sea-ice melts?

Let me try and summarise again. We've had 1 deg warming in the last century. Its been good. A further 1 deg will be better. But whether we get it or not is entirely out of our hands. We can no more control the weather than we can control the solar cycles (which are of coarse linked!!). So, if the warming continues, enjoy the benefits and mitigate the detriments. Saying that the last time we had this level of temperature, some things were bad and therefore we need to 'do something', completely misses the point.

Poirot, I had a look at that link to the German report and the sunspots.
Interesting because the Maunder minimum does not refer to a temperature
minimum but to a sunspot minimum. That a temperature minimum occurred
at the same time, may or may not be a coincidence.

I have been noting because of my use of HF radio for many years the
sunspot count. I make contact every afternoon with a friend near
London and I can assure you that radio condx (abv conditions) are
worse that I have ever experienced, especially since we are supposed
to be approaching a maximum which occurs every eleven years.
Last year or the year before there were several days with zero
sunspots an unheard of thing.
So if indeed there is a connection between sunspots and global warming
and/or global cooling, it will soon become apparent.
It may well explain the pause in warming as condx have been poor since
before the last cycle.

The Ionospheric Prediction Service publishes sunspot counts
continuously so it might be worth keeping track.

Bazz,

Yes, the fact that the Maunder Minimum coincided with the Little Ice Age, might have been a mere fluke. But then when we realise that the next time the sun ran through a series of weak cycles, called the Dalton Minimum (around 1800) the world also suffered a period of falling temperatures - think Napoleon and the retreat from Moscow - there seems to be less of a coincidence.

And now, as we find the (perhaps) beginning of another period of weak solar maxima, the temps appear to stall. Are we headed for another Dalton minimum (or worse yet, another Maunder Minimum) with the consequent fall in temps? There are more than a few scientists and many solar scientists who think so. One of them is Abdussamatov who someone mentioned earlier and who has been predicting exactly this for over a decade.

We also have Svensmark, who has a theory about how a weaker sun will affect the climate via cosmic rays (ie weak sun -> more cosmic rays hitting the earth -> more clouds -> more heat being reflected backinto space). IF this theory is correct, it adds a whole new layer of complication since the temps will be affected not just by the strength or otherwise of the sun but also by the amount of cosmic rays the earth is exposed to. (As the solar system moves through the galaxy, the amount of cosmic rays passing by increases and decreases.) I have seen some research suggesting this (the movement through the galaxy), may help to explain moves into and out of ice ages

Who'd have though that that big yellow thing in the sky could affect our climate, eh?

Of coarse, if it turns out that it was the sun all along, there are going to be a lot of embarrassed people around. Indeed so many red faces that they may re-heat the earth just with their radiance.:

mhaze, Bazz,

Interesting article....the implications of ice melt.

http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2004/05mar_arctic/

Poirot,

Two things of note re your last post:

1) Your report was nearly a decade old: “March 5, 2004”
2) It cited this little gem: “But the facts do suggest that the changes we're seeing in the Arctic could potentially affect currents that warm Western Europe, and that's gotten a lot of people concerned."

Ahem! it was pointed out to you about a month back that this was all but debunked.

(though admittedly you might not have taken it in ‘cause at the time you were too busy singing "naanaanaana I can’t hear you", with your fingers firmly plugged in your ears)

So I'll show it too you again:
“For a century, schoolchildren have been taught that the massive ocean current known as the Gulf Stream carries warm water from the tropical Atlantic Ocean to northwestern Europe…It might be time to retire that tidy story… those effects are not as clear as conventional wisdom might suggest
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=new-simulations-question-gulf-stream-role-tempering-europes-winters

PS: You might want to check out this opportunity (talk about perfect match!):
http://www.simplyhired.com.au/a/jobs/list/q-used+car+sales/l-sydney,+nsw

BTW, we were talking about Arctic sea-ice melting. How much sea level rise do you think will occur if all the sea-ice melts?

mhaze: I presume you are joking? But then again may you are not....