Did all those studies not tell you that the net increase of CO2 in the air is from fossil fuel CO2? The oceans are still in a net uptake mode, absorbing along the 50% of what we put in, co-adding to acidification. (Why this round circle again as debunked argument?)

The original page where above image is included in: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beryllium-10. You might want to look up what 10Be indicates... hmmm, nothing new from what was posted before on these forums: More galactic rays when there's less solar activity to sum it up... no idea what the sunspot / 10Be twin plotting is supposed to infer v.v. total solar irradiance intensities, but 10Be is a known reverse proxy, so my interpretation has been for a while. Looking at the last 60 years of that plot (30 missing for 10Be!) AND the temperature record, there's clear indication that, well that's it's been warming, regardless of what else we put in the air over and above CO2 and other known greenhouse gases. This does though tell something something now does it not... through ca 2010:



Past 9300 years per Leif Svalgaard http://www.leif.org/EOS/Holocene-TSI.pdf . He's one of the sanes posting at WUWT.

his reconstruction: http://www.landscheidt.info/images/steinhilber.png

And summary on 10Be findings:
See, however you slice and dice it, TSI is still just 0.1% varying between maximum and minimum.

Don't know what it says about having a Vespa and a Car versus not having either. As eluded, the Carbon footprint is lower... you've made your lives choices too. Good for you to only go by push-bike and public transport... no need to buy CO2 offsets.

The beach was too hot, so we ran.

--//--

P.S. Still standing with that dubious claim of no warming in the 21st century? Same class as your opinion on the Guardian article? Aliens better stay away. We've got methyl iodide [some countries allow it to be sprayed on choice crops, which are then fed to the people]. Do enjoy the sun. Recommended outdoor dosage is 3 hours per day. extended indoors without good fresh-air ventilation impairs the cranial function.

P.P.S. When will *global* cooling start and hold? Please share... interested in any magic wand predictions.

We actually have three power grids...east, west and Texas. Texas was set up independently during world war II to be self sufficient for manufacturing.

Scary. I especially love this part.

More of that Drought as foretold by the UK Environment Secretary Caroline Spelman

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-14622549

http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/homeandleisure/floods/125305.aspx


Still waiting for those Railway Line buckling scorching Summer 2011 temps

That you're not ashamed of making these claims I knew for longer and putting a trend-line into sunspots does not mean much either, as has long has been explained to you v.v. change of solar output... suffering from sieve memory? Any blind person can see that the trend is down since the mid 50's. Now put those sunspots against the temperature curve in combination. How is it that the world keeps warming, decade on decade notwithstanding?



In a democracy you get to vote a few times every few years. Then you can vote in those that want to be "misunderestimated". We've had the TRIANA satellite stuck to the ground [work of the Bush admin] which would have given us already total net energy budget record for over 10 years... that what comes in from the sun, that what comes out as radiated out from the planet aka energy budget. If you think we can measure solar watts arriving [varying 0.1% from max to min, when there's NO sunspots] don't you think there's not been measuring of the back radiation? The stratosphere is cooling exactly as the theories have predicted... because less heat is escaping to space, because...

Here some language on Stratospheric cooling versus tropospheric warming. It's been dumbed down, but it's still well above what gets printed over at Watts:

http://www.wunderground.com/resources/climate/strato_cooling.asp

At Watts you read luminary comments such as:

"That is real science, but I don't understand anything of it"

It's not the sun, the constantness expressed in that curve at top of this chart...



and it's signal 250 times amplified to make the variation visible, but I've not told you or anyone anything new, did I, a circular repeated just to wear out the reader till you've got the plot to yourself and Watts commentators... why is greenland ...? (oh never mind)

Maybe you'd like to tell the good folk why we're still warming despite the sunspots.

Food for thought, but not to you!

--//--

P.S. please continue to trot out sound-bites. We'll not be waiting on a comprehensive single post where you put everything together, which is the point where you'll refer to ''we're to puny to do this, or the standard hand-flapping: We don't know enough''. Arrhenius and Langley had it already roughed out at the end of the 19th century, in true science. By the 50's we knew for sure... except it's happening faster... 12 years it took to add the same demands for an additional 1 billion people who've we've got trouble feeding. 9 billion by 2050. That is if food and water wars have not broken out by then. Shortly after 2050 a doubling of CO2 from per-industrial will have been reached... 560 ppmv CO2... 0.056% of the atmosphere, when in 2011 the sun's average through August 15 was 0,00878659% less than in 2003 that other heatwave year. 2003 had 63.6 sunpots on average. 2011 had 40.2 sunspots through July. That wow, 50% less... has it been cooling or warming since the start of this millennium?

P.P.S. how many years are missing from your sunspot plot, where is the x-axis reference to give the readers proper perspective? Why did it cool post war, notwithstanding the sunspot crescendo then? Fortunately, others have long thought this through, put this to paper and tested this ad infinitum even whilst the rail-tracks in the UK are not buckling now. The Arctic Oscillation is nicely doing it's job to keep you cold and wet, just how you like it, to have an excuse while commenting on what you see outside that garden window.