1. Figures 5 & 6:

    Hansen’s graphs show that the assumptions of radiative forcing by GHGs were too high. He is showing that when actual values are used, the temp profiles of the IPCC are exactly as they should be.

    He has sidestepped the bullet by saying the “damage” to the planet has been slower than expected, and Chinese air pollution has been greater than expected and caused a greater than expected cooling. We were supposed to fry and we didn’t, but that doesn’t mean we are safe: get our economy going again and clean up Chinese air, and we are doomed.

    He, like Erhlich and his coming famines, has shown he/they have no disconnect.

  2. Wait – James Hansen believes there’s been no warming for 16 years? Hasn’t he seen that video over on Slate that you linked too? Why would he waste his time with a study showing that warming was really continuing despite the globe not warming if it was still so obviously warming?

  3. no significant warming does mean ”no” warming. it continues to warm. natural variability and industrial aerosols can have a cooling effect. but only a temporary one. all previous warmings have been subject to flat spots as well. it does mean a change in trend

  4. In Australia [ where i live ] fish have been moving southward to cooler waters . This indicates warming in northern waters.There are many such indicators involving both fauna and flora worldwide.You would have to be in deep denial to ignore such findings.


Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *