re: #308 freetoken

You need to update your talking points, as even Lindzen, the proponent of “iris” effect and those nasty clouds is giving up on it.

On the catastrophe part, you skip over the entire paleoclimate record. During the previous interglacial periods, the Eemian roughly 100,000 years ago, and the previous interglacial before that, temperatures were just a bit warmer than today and yet sea levels were several feet higher. In other words, there is reason to believe that even modest temperature rises over today will lead to significant sea level rise.

As for the sensitivity of the climate to CO2 doubling, you are of course unwilling to admit to anything more than the purely radiative balance (which is near 1.2C), though again all the paleoclimatology data would indicate the sensitivity has to be more than that.

Finally, the models area hind-cast to the entire 20th century record and unlike your assertion, those were observations, and indeed the models do reproduce the 20th century fairly well. The three generations of models have shown progress on this matter, and the third generation handles the major changes as well as the volcanic influences very well.

Your right, the science is more nuance than your current grasp.

Damn Freetoken! Look at that post! I tip my hat to you!