Those anxiously awaiting my detailed reply to RP's reply to my reply to RP's attack on the IPCC are doomed to disappointment. I'm afraid its fallen into the lifes-too-short category.
In summary: RP has forgotten the T^4 radiative feedback; and the IPCC figure is a difference from 1750.
Now, who to vote for, or against?
- Log in to post comments
More like this
RP Sr's one-man kamikaze attack against the IPCC continues. RPs point appears to be that the IPCCs forcing-since-1750 of +1.6 W/m2 is not compatible with a current imbalance of about 0.85 W/m2. Sadly RPs link to the Hansen paper concerned is currently broken so I'm somewhat guessing what this…
According to google reader, RP Sr posted the below today to his "blog" (only its not really a blog cos it doesn't allow comments), in a post entitled Question The Weblog Real Climate. And indeed he did; the comment is here. This is something RP has been harping on about for a while. Gavin gave him…
Stop me if someone has done this already (Eli?; OK, Deltoid has something)... I'm still catching up. But US climate report comes under fire caught my eye, as did the link to RP's take.
My first comment would be, isn't this report just a teensy bit pointless, we have the IPCC report. I doubt there…
Ha. While I'm wasting my time on heat waves, ATTP is reaping the clicks with Manichean paranoia, a far more amusing topic. After all, everyone loves RP Jr [content advisory: talk given at the GWPF: may pollute your brain]. I'm not terribly interested in most of it, but I'll talk to "Engage with…
>vote
Advice welcome, on that, I'm guessing none of them are you?
[Oh no, I have no time... -W]
nice, make a drive by and then plead incompetence
[A self referential comment, how sweet -W]
I see that RPs still has his comments turned off. How convenient!
William, all the best in your new career!
From a friend across the pond.
William - I am disappointed. Restating your misinterpretation of my weblog does not add to the scientific discussion of the issues I raised.
In any case, best wishes for the Holidays! Roger
[Nor does your restatement of your original point. I fear we shall have to agree to disagree over this. Festive wishes to you & your family too -W]
WVhybrid, think asymmetric blogfare.
Roger, that's mighty bold talk for someone who's turned off the comments on his blog. You got plenty of scientific response when you had them turned on. Going forward, of course there will be less interest in responding to your material since most of those reading your website won't see the responses.
While it's true that you also got a lot of noise in the comments, that's mainly because you kept encouraging those denialist fanboyz.
[A reminder to people that politeness is required -W]