I “claim” nothing. And the warming did stop in 1998.
The facts are as I stated.
You know, since you stated earlier, that multiple cycles are overlapping and that La Niña/El Niño have strong effects on measured temperatures. To choose a strong El Niño peak as your starting date is at best disingenuous.
The suggestion that sulphate cooling masked AGW warming for ~30 years after 1940 is an excuse that cannot be correct because of the warming effects of sulphate aerosols combined with soot particles.
Nonsense. The sulfate emissions (net cooling) virtually ended, but soot (net warming) continues to be pumped into the atmosphere. That a net cooling agent stopped being added while a net warming agent continued to be added and warming ensued does not in any way run counter to the hypothesis that sulfates were responsible for the prior cooling.
and these combined particles are also linked with the burning of fossil fuels
Which would provide more evidence for the need to limit these emissions.
Additionally, it has been found that increases to sulphate aerosols combined with soot particles have a strong warming effect (0.55 Wm-2)
Yet soot on its own has a warming effect of 0.9 Wm-2. Remove the sulfates and what it left?
One fact that I would point out is that the Sun has increased its output by ~30% in the 2.5 billion years since the Earth has had an oxygen-rich atmosphere. This is a ~30% rise in radiative forcing that has been provided by the Sun.
That does not follow.
AGW-promotion is ‘religious’
Again, nonsense. To postulate that virtually the entire scientific community and more specifically climate science community is under some religious spell is hogwash.
Validity of the ‘Heartland List’ of scientists statements denying AGW
A considerable number of the scientists dispute their names being included on the list for legitimate reasons (their quotes being pulled out of context and their research being misrperesented). This is not the first time you have been involved with such a dishonest list (Leipzig Declaration).Of course I know what ENSO and unforced variability are
Given that you are fully aware of El Niño / Southern Occilation, why choose a peak year to begin your time scale on the supposed ending of global warming?
If you want to try to understand this then read my publications (yes, they are peer reviewed and I provided a reference to one)
Energy&Environment is not carried in the ISI and is widely considered substandard and agenda driven. Its editor is Sonja Boehmer-Christiansen has publicly admitted, “I’m following my political agenda — a bit, anyway. But isn’t that the right of the editor?”
As a side not that does not directly relate to the validity of Richard’s arguments, he is a coal industry lobbyist and so has a vested interest in dismissing AGW.
