When will this farce end?

I understand that the models do not consider the ocean oscillations - probably because they do not know enough to forecast them. However, these would seem to be a crucial part of the issue. Until we have a better understanding of the climate and can separate out the natural and man-made components we will have to rely on the idealogical "it must be man" approach.

"An important scientific innovation rarely makes its way by gradually winning over and converting its opponents: What does happen is that the opponents gradually die out."

Max Planck

Some here are in serious denial - and it is not the "deniers"!

Consider:

"Leading climate scientist Kevin Trenberth has told reporting climatescience.com that he believes the pause in global warming may be caused by long term changes in the Pacific Ocean.

Trenberth and colleague John Fasullo argue in a new scientific paper that the massive El Nino Pacific Ocean warming event that occurred in 1997 and 1998 triggered the pause."

http://www.reportingclimatescience.com/news-storie...

A paper by Curry JA: "Overview of Arctic Cloud and Radiation Characteristics"

http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/1520-0...

From the UK met Office: "The recent pause in warming"

http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/news/recent-p...

A question to the saner minds here: "Why do you let C get away with such nonsense?

@ Antarcticice: We have data as well. See the graph. Don't read too much into it, though. Just because I post a graph of declining temperatures does not necessarily mean that I think warming has stopped. I think it will resume in about 10 years or so.

My last 10 years have been the tallest I have ever been. Am I still growing?

No the alarmists will continue. RealClimate put up a post a few years ago suggesting a pause of 20 to 30 years after which global warming will come back stronger than ever. This was a guest post that the hosts said they disagreed with, but clearly they were hedging their bets. On the chance that the pause, which was nonexistent, would continue, they wanted something to fall back on. Look for a post like, 'This is no different from what we expected. We even posted at the time, well before those silly skeptics were talking about a pause..."

So, what you're saying is that you have decided the pause is significant enough to dismiss AGW but don't want to wait another 10 years for the evidence to confirm or refute that?

And if your answer is that another 10 years would be a good confirmation that AGW is wrong, then that means you're basing your position on incomplete data.

If the next 10 years shows warming, then where does that leave you?

Your position on the pause makes no sense to me. Either the pause you speak of is significant, in which case the next 10 years will confirm that. Or it isn't, in which case the next 10 years will confirm that. Either way the only sensible position is to wait rather than jumping to a conclusion.

If you believe Joann Nova, the CAGW movement went into an irreversable decline on June 11, 2011. She analyzed new reports related to global warming and found a shart drop on that date. Also around that time, the carbon credit market in the U.S. collapsed, followed by Europe not long after.

I'm sure the science of global warming/cooling/climate change will be debated for decades to come, but politically, it's a dead issue.

Industrialization is Bahh ahhh ahhh, LMFAO very funny

For alarmists, when they know everything already, how are they going to let a few facts get in their way or tarnish their own legend in your own mind.

Nothing like a few facts and comedic mocking to get under their skin.

Yet again, what pause, it is a figment of deniers imaginations the warmest year is 2010 just 4 years ago next warmest is 2005 again with the period you claim as a pause.

The IPCC estimate is that average temp rise per decade is about 0.11c and it rose more than that based on the actual data

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/2010/13#gtemp

It actually went up 0.2c, I would be interested how deniers work that into a pause (or better yet cooling), but then I've given up trying to fathom the denier mind.

I note the usual empty rants about Gore, fear mongering and brain washed sheep etc but also the usual lack of anything concrete to back your claims.

It will end when these scam artists are caught for the fraud and put in prison or the money dries up.

Quote by James Spann, American Meteorological Society-certified meteorologist: "Billions of dollars of grant money [over $50 billion] are flowing into the pockets of those on the man-made global warming bandwagon. No man-made global warming, the money dries up. This is big money, make no mistake about it. Always follow the money trail and it tells a story."

Quote by Tom McElmurry, meteorologist, former tornado forecaster in Severe Weather Service: “Governmental officials are currently casting trillions down huge rat hole to solve a problem which doesn’t exist....Packs of rats wait in that [rat] hole to reap trillions coming down it to fill advocates pockets....The money we are about to spend on drastically reducing carbon dioxide will line the pockets of the environmentalists....some politicians are standing in line to fill their pockets with kick back money for large grants to the environmental experts....In case you haven’t noticed, it is an expanding profit-making industry, growing in proportion to the horror warnings by government officials and former vice-presidents.”

The pause I see is that people like yourself can go your adult lives without learning anything.

EDIT: Nice try Ian, you do know what the letters "G" "I" "G" and "O" stand for, but you don't know what it means.

Another EDIT: You don't understand how it would be applied to climate models--you don't really understand what the term means. I don't care if you know every letter in the four letter abbreviation, you just haven't understood the meaning of it. Not surprising, since you have no background in modeling and probably not much in computer science.

EDIT for C: Of course Curry is a climate scientist and she has many peer reviewed papers. Where did you get that she wasn't? She's just a loose cannon that shoots off her mouth without thinking about what she says.

Leave it to a lame denier to be still hung up on Gore and still talking about an imaginary pause. For Christ's sake the 17 warmest years have all been within the last 18 years and you dodo's think that is a pause Dum, Da,Dim, Dim DUM

Ian...You are kidding, right? Just the fact that Curry is associated with this crap is enough to toss the link aside. Judith Curry is not a climatologist and has had absolutely no education in climatology. She is but a self [proclaimed climate scientist. She has never submitted a peer reviewed paper, even in her own field.which is geography and Geophysical Sciences Sorry Charlie still no GW pause

Boy did you advertise for ignorant deniers to give me thumbs down I guess the truth brings out the worst in them

Wage...Nova is a diehard denier who has no training in climate science but calls herself a climate scientist Worthless trash

They will simply start claiming that their efforts are paying off but more needs to be done.