On 08/10/13 12:59, Terry Fields wrote:
Roger Chapman wrote:

As for settled science some parts are much more settled than than others
as can be seen from the graph that Terry cited and largely ignored.

I did explain it's importance, in that the other L and VL contributors
that form the majority of effects might sum the CO2/CH4 contribution
to zero, leaving solar as the dominant factor. This suggestion has
at least the merit of explaining the Russian view, while waiting for
the latest downscaling of the CO2 'threat'. It could also be the cause
of the ever-lowering of the value of the suggested 'feedback'
mechanism.

In view of the fact that the Sun has been studied for ~200 years, it
might seem strange that its forcing effect is so poorly understood,
and how little the knowledge of the other effects has advanced in the
last 10 years despite the money that's been squandered on the subject
area.

n momey has been spent looking at anythung but Anthrpogenic forcings
because there is only money to be made out of climate change if
legisdlatiuon forces people to buy what they would not otherwise have done.

If the sun is causing it, no one wants to hear it. It channels no tax
dollars


--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.