You can skip the El Nino. Take the last six years for HadCrut, RSS and UAH monthly data. Run a linear regression through it, and get a downward trend for all of them.

http://reallyrealclimate.blogspot.com/

If you add Jan 2008 to the graph, even Hansen’s GISS points down.

Of course we are sorry about cherry picking intervals. Only AGW proponents are allowed that priveledge.

You said ask a physicist I answered I can’t help it if you don’t like the answer. If you don’t want to hear what a physicist has to say don’t suggest asking one.

I noticed that you again have ignored me.I posted Dr. Glassman’s rebuttal to what you wrote about him.HERE IN THIS THREAD.It is possible that you missed it.But since you have ducked it.I will assume you have no answer to his answer to your unflattering weak rebuttal you posted at unrealclimate.

I can understand why too.

Since I grew up close to the pigment factory Tioxide and spent a fair time in other industry that used pigments for various purposes I can’t go along with more fine solids ocean pollution. We could instead wrap the globe in white tissue paper knowing it would soon completely break down thus keeping major industry going. BTW titanium white is a “permanent” artist colour and so are iron oxides.

http://www.chemlink.com.au/titanium.htm

Oddly my first thought after reading Dr Steve was what happens to the oceans re CO2 etc if we carry on as we once thought appropriate

http://www.environment.gov.au/coasts/publications/somer/annex3/tas.html

soer.justice.tas.gov.au/2003/cem/7/issue/55/index.php

http://www.ilovemycarbondioxide.com/pdf/Global_climate_change_has_natural_causes.pdf

‘We have shown that the ice core data from the warm period (around 42 KYBP) to the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM) and from the LGM to Holocene transition can be used to constrain the dust aerosol radiative forcing during these transitions. We find the dust radiative forcing to be 3.3 ± 0.8 W/m2. Assuming that the climate sensitivity is the same for both transitions, we obtain [the climate sensitivity] = 0.49 ± 0.07 K/Wm_2. This suggests 95% likelihood of warming between 1.3 and 2.3 K due to doubling of atmospheric concentration of CO2 (assuming that the CO2 doubling produces the radiative forcing of 3.7 W/m2 according to the IPCC 2007 report). The ECHAM5 model simulation suggests that during the LGM the global average aerosol optical depth might have been almost twice the current value.

Such results are compatible with a climate sensitivity around or below 2 K for doubling of CO2 were also recently deduced using cloud resolving models incorporated within GCMs [Miura et al., 2005; Wyant et al., 2006], from observational data [Chylek et al., 2007; Schwartz, 2007], and from a set of GCM simulations constrained by the ERBE (Earth Radiation Budget Experiment) observations [Forster and Gregory, 2006].

All these results together with our work presented in this paper support the lower end of the climate sensitivity range of 2 to 4.5 K suggested by the IPCC 2007 report [Solomon et al., 2007].’

Chylek, P., and U. Lohmann, 2008. Aerosol radiative forcing and climate sensitivity deduced from the Last Glacial Maximum to Holocene transition. Geophysical Research Letters, 35, L04804, doi:10.1029/2007GL032759.

It is interesting to note that in all the hysteria about AGW, there has been so little real discussion of the ‘ecoengineering’ implications of the generally acknowledged finding from GCMs etc that, over long periods negative forcing (cooling) due to the radiative effects of tropospheric aerosols has been so close to, and only slightly less than, the 3.7 W/m2 radiative forcing due to CO2 according to IPCC, 2007.

To me this means that the solution to the AGW problem, to the extent it might become more urgent (and we still have plenty of time to determine this so let us all calm down a bit ;-) simply involves the injection of environmentally benign aerosols into the atmosphere until such time as civilization can move beyond its present reliance on fossil fuels.

We already move thousands of commercial plane flights through altitudes sufficient to accomplish this each and every day. Our civilization also produce billions of tonnes of environmentally benign, highly IR reflective aerosols such as iron oxide and titanium dioxide pigments each and every day. We could also easily afford to paint every roof and highway in the world with titanium dioxide paint and not one bird would be blasted out of the sky either! Note here that titanium metal and the titanium dioxide have been proven to be the most non-toxic solids our civilization has ever encountered. This is why every internal prosthesis is generally now titanium (oxidising in situ).

Food for thought?

you clearly misunderstand what they are saying. That’s your problem, not theirs.