Quote from: hofor on April 13, 2015, 08:07:07 AM

Quote from: Spendulus on April 13, 2015, 02:01:07 AM

Quote from: hofor on April 13, 2015, 12:41:30 AM

Quote from: Ingatqhvq on April 09, 2015, 12:27:36 PM

Why won't Climate Scientists produce the empirical data that will prove their theory that CO2 is the primary culprit behind Climate Change and shut their critics up once and for all? Answer: The reason they refuse to show any data is because the data does not exist. In fact all the empirical data refutes their theory. So instead of showing the data that would prove their theory they manipulate the data; name call by calling anyone who disagrees with them "deniers" and try and shut people up.

Scientists have produced the empirical data that confirms that anthropogenic CO2 is causing the warming. It's there in countless studies by countless scientists. It's all summed up by the IPCC.

Can you name a single respected scientific organization that rejects anthropogenic global warming or the reports from the IPCC?

Yes. The Thermometers That Say No Warming in the last 20 years. You know, TTTSNW. They are very, very reputable.

This is not true. The measurements show that more of the excess energy is going into the oceans. But the atmosphere is still warming as well, although it's warming at a slower rate at the moment (again, due to where the energy is going).

Remember that climate is about the trend over time. Cherry-picking shorter periods of time is not an honest way to go about things. Even if the temperature does have periods of variation (the measured temperature has gone down for shorter periods in the past), the overall trend is still up. It's disingenuous to pretend that the science says that the surface temperature will only ever increase. The science actually does point to periods of fluctuations up and down.

You need to look at the trend.

Cherry picking? Don't make me laugh. It was cherry picking that caused the problem, namely looking at disappearing ice caps and such with only three decades of satellite data. Now we have two decades of data showing no statistically significant warming, and that, my friend, means it is totally correct to say "no warming in 20 years."

Please don't lecture about fluctations and put words in others' mouths that the did not say or imply. It is the secular trend behind the fluctuations which is being discussed, not the fact that winter is cold and summer is hot. It is the basic trendline as established with a calculation of the climate sensitivity factor. And when we compute that with 20 years of no warming, we do in fact find a far, far lower climate sensitivity to co2 than Climate Alarmists have been shrilling crying doom over.