Quote:
Quote by: xyzer  Oh really? And I'm sure they appear in the predictive models upon which forecasts of climate change are based? Recently we see that the anomaly is in the models. Actual measuremnts refute the predictions? |
I've pointed out earlier in the thread that model projections are in very good agreement with observations. Yes, cyclical temperature fluctuations are accounted for in climate models.
Quote:
|
They didn't involve natural influence enough and were strongly influenced by the relationship(correlation) of only two climate factors(CO2 and warming)? . Since the original UN climate change summary some 7+ years ago other studies and research have shown significant natural factors involved in the puzzle.
|
No one has ever denied that there are natural factors contributing to the current climate change. However, it's clear that the most important factors are anthropogenic.
Also, as I've again pointed out several times, climate models which include only natural or only anthropogenic forcings do not match observation. It is only when human and natural factors are brought together that projectiopns match reality.
Quote:
Even the IPCC summary indicated that if humans could cut emissions it would take about two centuries to feel any efects?
This to me as an admission that natural factors rule!
|
This is actually an admission that the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, as well as various feedback mechanisms related to temperature change, will still be active even if we reduce emissions now.