Recent content by inol

I can't comment on the data used there, but temperatures have risen faster and by greater numbers in the past. You are right to be skeptical of the site though, at first glance is seems to only be presenting paleoclimate data, but here and there are sprinkles of text which seem to have a...

Biggest problem with Becks argument is how CO2 levels are all over the place early 20th century, but as soon as we start measuring them properly it goes into a nice smooth curve with no year differing more than 3ppm from the last. The previous measuring methods were clearly far less reliable.

You could say that about the period 1980-1986, or the period 1987-1996 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Satellite_Temperatures.png

The recent "Global Warming Swindle" documentary for example made the claim that volcanoes emit more CO2 than man, and I have had plenty of arguments with people claiming that there is debate about the origin of the co2. Clearly it's not a strawman to say that it's a common argument used by skeptics.

It depends on what you mean. If you mean there is no debate the Earth is warming and there is a scientific consensus that it's warming, then skeptics usually agree. Although there are some who don't agree the Earth is warming, and therefore they could argue there isn't a consensus that the...

Apparently not http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=13

A bit like counter terrorism experts

My opinion is that enhanced greenhouse effect is the best current explanation as a significant factor to explain the recent temperature trends. Other explanations, such as a strong solar cause, or GCRs, are not well ironed out and seem to have more problems. There is the possibility that...

I imagine this will be largely settled within the next 30 years as long as solar trends remain the same. In 30 years time if temperature has started leveling off, or even falling, surely that will falsify the AGW theory (or at least as it stands today). On the otherhand if temperature rises...

I have serious reason to doubt that particular claim. If it were true what is the motive for not releasing both the email and the name of the person who sent it? There are three possibilities a) there is no mysterious email-writer and the claim has been invented knowing that it cannot be...

hmm so should this kind of thing in future be known as "doing a kramer" or "doing a gibson"?

Not the only science issue where this happens. This is particularly rant filled, especially the updates. I guess the guy might have had a bad week or something... http://www.pkblogs.com/abstractfactory/2005/10/only-debate-on-intelligent-design-that.html