I use the stock-market analogy. The fundamental forces push the stock market up: inflation, population growth, technological advancement, and globalization of economies.

But even with this underlying push toward growth, there will be up years and down ears. And in a good year, there will be some sectors that go down. And within a single sector, there will be some stocks that rise, and others that fall, and some that fail all together. The daily volatility is much higher than the monthly, which is higher than the annual.

But the fundamental forces push on steadily, and in any 20 year time period you choose, the stock market has gone up.

Have you ever stood on the shoreline watching the incoming tide in it's slow progression up the beach? I guarantee next time you do this you will think of global warming!

Now, when a wave breaks, it continues up the beach, past the mean sea level, until it runs out of momentum, then flows back down the beach to rejoin the sea. Now waves aren't all exactly the same; there is some variation in height, also the spacing between them. In addition, how far a breaking wave travels up the beach is modified by it's interaction with the previous returning one. It will, in turn, affect the following wave in a similar manner, taking some of its energy, robbing it of some of its momentum.

So, whilst the tide is expected to come in in a predictable way, what actually happens at the waters edge is far from predictable; it is chaotic! Some waves travel up the beach while others just dwindle away to nothing in a way that seems totally random. Occasionally, conditions will be right to allow a wave to progress further, beyond the normal range, in the same way that a strong El Nino can affect global temperatures.

Now, just in case the analogy isn't obvious, the waves represent the variation in the system; ENSO and other cycles, the 'noise' if you like, whilst the tide represents the underlying temperature trend; the 'signal'.

If you didn't know the state of the tide, you could not tell from just watching say 10 waves or so, whether or not the tide was coming in. You might conclude the tide was turning, you might even conclude that it was going out! Or, if you were an AGW proponent, you would conclude that the variation due to the waves was such that the signal couldn't be reliably determined and that a longer period of observation was required. Watch 30 waves and you would see the trend, watch 100 and it would be obvious to everyone.

At least it should be, though there will probably always be some who will look only at the last few.

Of course the limitation with this is that tides themselves are cyclical; they will turn and receed eventually. The problem we face is a tide that will be incoming indefinitely and we don't know where the final high water mark will be.

CO2 has limits in warming the earth. Do you believe everything that AGW advocates tell you?

http://tallbloke.files.wordpress.com/201...

I would accept a detailed description over propaganda. If you can read and understand this, then you will know that CO2 has limits in warming the planet.

The only noise I hear is a cry from AGW people.

First off you get sarcastic remarks about shoveling global warming because we get stupid remarks about snow becoming a thing of the past.

Here is an analogy for you about noise:

You're being stabbed over and over again by a huge guy, he's got a 6 inch knife and a tattoo on his arm that says NATURE. You're brother Fossil Fuel walks in and see's this horrible scene so he takes out his fingernail clippers, and you know the little file that you can hardly use for nothing, he starts stabbing you with the little fingernail clipper file. You're like WHAT THE HELL, YOUR SUPPOSED TO BE HELPING ME! He says are you kidding me, that guy is huge and I couldn't possible stop him with this tiny thing. You say but you've got to atleast try even if it doesn't help it can't hurt. A light bulb goes off in his head and he realizes the truth in what you are saying, turns the file on the attacker and quickly gets the 6 inch blade buried in his throat.

While your brothers good intentions amounted to nothing atleast he tried and that's what really counts in life. Unfortunately the noise was too powerful for him to do anything about, but if we all take out our fingernail clipper files we can make a difference for the future of the planet and our children.

As a true believer in our EVER CHANGING climate, I now give you the REAL reasons, not just the background ones caused by CO2.

CO2 has no measurable effect on the climate!. If anyone watched the recent series presented by Professor Brian Cox on the Solar system, and you knew anything about astronomy, you would see that the weather on Earth is affected by gravity, in exactly the same way as Io, a moon of Jupiter, is affected. Io is a solid lump of rock the same size as our moon, that due to gravitational forces, liquefies and causes volcanoes. The same applies to one of the moons of Saturn, the name of which I missed. EXACTLY the same forces that are causing the increased volcanic and earthquake activity here on Earth in the past 20 or so years due to the line up of the major planets and the Sun.

I must agree with Jesse, that it is not just random noise, and his link has a great video which explains how the warming trend shows no change over the last 16 years when corrected for ENSO.

But a good analogy would be if you were to listen to a distant radio station while your neighbour is watching his/her favorite TV program on an old fashioned CRT television.

It's not all random noise. If you correct for the variations in the amount of solar radiation we receive, volcanic activity, greenhouse gases, and ocean circulations such as El Ni?o and La Ni?a, the temperature of the Earth for the last 30 rears has risen or about 0.15°C per decade at the 99.5% confidence level. The reference below has a video that explains that.

How about understanding the warming capabilities of CO2 better. http://beforeitsnews.com/science-and-tec...

I don't know if a nuclear power engineer can help a climate scientist in their diagnosis. Are they even in the same league? As far as I know engineers don't believe in shape-shifting aliens to help them prove or disprove a certain theory. They usually use mathematics.

-------------------------------

Jesse - Why don't you use NASA's data? Temperatures have increased 0.5-0.6 Celsius since 1880. That's over 13 decades and equals a 0.046 Celsius per decade average. Or is it that you only want to concentrate on the past 30 years? I understand if you want to use the last 30. It shows a more drastic change in temperature. Typical alarmism. I see that your compadre Dookster has his alarmist bells ringing too.

Could you state which denialists you refer to, the Christian creationists or the anti vaxxers ?

I only ask because you stated a few questions ago that when you use the 'denier' label you are actually referring to one of these groups and not anti agw people.