"k x wrote: Maps Onburt - comparisons need to be in the same units. You can't compare solar intensity (watts per square meter) to CO2 levels (parts per million). You have to compare the energy exchange processes. CO2 in the atmosphere has increased from a preindustrial level about about 270 ppm to a current level of about 385 ppm. (Rumours aside, it's clear that human activity is responsible for the bulk of that increase.)
So, you're arguing that increasing incoming radiation by 0.1% will have a greater effect than decreasing outgoing radiation by 42%. That seems unlikely to me, even considering that this oversimplified comparison doesn't account for the differences in spectral composition of radiation emitted by Earth and by the sun."
Sorry Elliot, I can't say I entirely agree with the position of your links.
The main (And by far most important) part of the links - at least IMO - is how the flimsiest evidence is seized upon by the climate change lobby and then quoted thereafter as incontrovertible fact, Terror.
When even the authors of the reports are saying their data is being interpreted in a way they had not intended, surely something smells a bit fishy...
Not saying it's all bogus either, Ube. Just that we haven't got the faintest clue what's true or not with any of it, right now. Far too much has been hidden or manipulated or just plain lied about for any of it to be taken at face value, though.
One of the fundamental problems in any research field is the acquisition of funding. And that is more and more a function of 'return of investments' considerations.
As such it would require a basic change in attitude - fundamental research, which certainly would be required in the climate field to get a sound basis for discussion, doesn't 'pay back'. Hence people 'trick' to obtain any funding or to justify why they research there at all.
While public funding, which in many countries is on the decline, often covers that - the necessary private funding emphasizes application orientation.
It is unfortunate that the worth of knowledge gained from basic research is not valued more than that from applied sciences. A problem German universities, among others, have often encountered - fundamental knowledge has been acquired, but somebody else abroad has gotten all the patents for products developped on that basis.