planet has not warmed for the past 15 years.....

..........Yet, in its paper, the Met Office claimed that the consequences now would be negligible – because the impact of the sun on climate is far less than man-made carbon dioxide. Although the sun’s output is likely to decrease until 2100, ‘This would only cause a reduction in global temperatures of 0.08C.’ Peter Stott, one of the authors, said: ‘Our findings suggest a reduction of solar activity to levels not seen in hundreds of years would be insufficient to offset the dominant influence of greenhouse gases.’

These findings are fiercely disputed by other solar experts.

‘World temperatures may end up a lot cooler than now for 50 years or more,’ said Henrik Svensmark, director of the Center for Sun-Climate Research at Denmark’s National Space Institute. ‘It will take a long battle to convince some climate scientists that the sun is important. It may well be that the sun is going to demonstrate this on its own, without the need for their help.’

He pointed out that, in claiming the effect of the solar minimum would be small, the Met Office was relying on the same computer models that are being undermined by the current pause in global-warming.

CO2 levels have continued to rise without interruption and, in 2007, the Met Office claimed that global warming was about to ‘come roaring back’. It said that between 2004 and 2014 there would be an overall increase of 0.3C. In 2009, it predicted that at least three of the years 2009 to 2014 would break the previous temperature record set in 1998.

Read more: [link to www.dailymail.co.uk]

i cant believe that there are still "scientists" that rely on computer models and refuse to look outside and your there own eyes and brains!!!!!!!!!!

....and yes i think the sun will be the one to win this argument and proove that its incharge not us...

........He believes that as the Met Office model attaches much greater significance to CO2 than to the sun, it was bound to conclude that there would not be cooling. ‘The real issue is whether the model itself is accurate,’ Dr Scafetta said. Meanwhile, one of America’s most eminent climate experts, Professor Judith Curry of the Georgia Institute of Technology, said she found the Met Office’s confident prediction of a ‘negligible’ impact difficult to understand.

‘The responsible thing to do would be to accept the fact that the models may have severe shortcomings when it comes to the influence of the sun,’ said Professor Curry. As for the warming pause, she said that many scientists ‘are not surprised’.

She argued it is becoming evident that factors other than CO2 play an important role in rising or falling warmth, such as the 60-year water temperature cycles in the Pacific and Atlantic oceans.

Read more: [link to www.dailymail.co.uk]

....well any1 with a window and an inclination to look outside can tell you that the whole global warming "scam" really isnt panning out that way that we were told it would when they started to ram it down our throats 10+ years ago....and as nice as it is to tax the crap out of us with "green taxes" that will "save the world" sooner or later its going to become clear that they were wrong....

liking the 1*
Mahalo

[link to www.dailymail.co.uk]

global warming is real

DH

Wake up and smell the roses

TB

The reality of understanding both random and semi-conditional influences and factors is of course impossible accurately. Climate being probably the most noteworthy. There are historical celestical, external and internal influences all of which are equally unpredictable and unstable (because of our relative ignorance)...leading to all kind of short and long-term specualtion based on geological (historical) findings and current monitoring and predictive modelling , which are about as accurate and realiable as we are (which is all very interesting and amusing but completely subjective really LOL)

why?

this could be the 'truth' as much as the opposing view.

you only 'know' what you are TOLD

you know FUCK ALL in actuality.

The problem with computer models is they can only model based on the limited variables input by human beings when in reality there is a lot more to it.

bingo....so basicly we know f*** all then