The IPCC radiative forcing hypothesis ignores the atmospheric and ocean circulations that transport surplus solar energy from the tropics to polar regions. Nowhere are local temperatures due solely to radiation processes, a fact that goes to underscore the fallacy of the hypothesis.
It takes about two minutes with Google for anyone to find out that global climate models do include atmospheric and ocean circulations. What’s disappointing about this is that back in November the Age had a story about Kininmonth in the Science section which had comments from scientists about Kininmonth’s arguments were no good. But now he gets an article in the Business section. What is going on?