• Powerful advocacy groups claiming to represent both science and the public in the name of morality and superior wisdom.

• Simplistic depictions of the underlying science so as to facilitate widespread ‘understanding.’

• ‘Events’, real or contrived, interpreted in such a manner as to promote a sense of urgency in the public at large.

• Scientists flattered by public attention and deferent to ‘political will’ and popular assessment of virtue.

• Significant numbers of scientists eager to produce the science demanded by the ‘public.’

Prof. R. S. Lindzen, MIT

[DC: Can this possibly be a serious comment? Alas, it appears the answer is yes. It's off topic, though - you have been warned]

Your last statement “Of course, there have been no decade-over-decade declines in the last forty years” seems at variance with your assertion that you have only valid data since 1979. One, that is only 30 years, and two we have experienced static or “slightly decreasing temperatures since 1998. Can you offer an explanation, including natural forcings that have offset the anthropogenic CO2 forcing since 1998?

[DC: The satellite-based tropospheric record goes back to 1979, but the surface records all show decadal increases in the 1980s relative to the 1970s. So my statement stands.

Within the 2000s, we do see natural variation from year to year, much of it from ENSO. Nevertheless, 2008 was the tenth warmest year in the instrumental record, but was relatively cool compared to immediately preceding years, due to confluence of a pronounced La Nina and a longer than usual inter-cycle solar trough.]

Do you have an explanation why there are periods of temperature decline when the CO2 curve shows relentless increase?

[DC: This article discusses contarian "analysis" of the satellite-derived tropospheric temperature record. That record exists only from 1979. There is no satrellite data before that time.

Twentieth century global temperature, including the slight decline between roughly 1940 and 1970, can only be explained by a combination of increasing anthropogenic influence and various natural factors. Please see IPCC Chapter 9 Executive Summary or the IPCC FAQ 9.2. Of course, there have been no decade-over-decade declines in the last forty years.]

Creating ‘ground-up’ models of climate using the known behaviors and effects and the most accurate current estimates of their values and coefficients: bad use of computers, phony baloney models, can predict anything/can’t even predict current climate.

Modeling temperature as simple sixth power of time: brilliantly incisive mathematical proof of cyclic nature of temperature.

So glad that’s all cleared up now.