It’s China’s fault. By dramatically increasing their combustion of coal, they have increased the concentration of fine particles in the atmosphere called sulphate aerosols, which reflect away solar radiation, countering the warming that should be occurring from increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide.Yeah - the direct opposite of what should be occurring if the sulphate aerosol theory is correct, which it isn't. So what does this mean? As per the above: "we have overestimated the gross sensitivity of temperature to carbon dioxide." I would add the adjective 'grossly' to that.
...the reason this is all so important is that if there is no good explanation for the lack of warming, then an increasingly viable alternative is that we have overestimated the gross sensitivity of temperature to carbon dioxide in our computer models.
...There is very little exchange of air between the northern and southern hemispheres, and basic climate science shows that most sulfates from China will rain out before they get across the thermal equator. In fact, there is a great deal of literature out there published by luminaries like the Department of Energy’s Ben Santer and NASA’s James Hansen claiming relative cooling of the northern hemisphere from sulfates, compared to the southern.
So, if it is indeed sulfates cooling the warming, given that there is no net change in global temperature, then the northern hemisphere should be cooling since 1998 (the first year in Kaufmann’s paper) while the southern warms. Here are the sad facts:
UPDATE: A blunder of staggering proportions by the IPCC
Steve McIntyre has uncovered a blunder on the part of Pachauri and the IPCC that is causing waves of doubt and calls for retooling on both sides of the debate. In a nutshell, the IPCC made yet another inflated claim that:The IPCC also has a solution to the problem that doesn't exist: Leaked: smoke and mirror geoengineering ideas from the IPCC…80 percent of the world‘s energy supply could be met by renewables by mid-century…Unfortunately, it has been revealed that this claim is similar to the Himalayan glacier melt by 2035 fiasco, with nothing independent to back it up. Worse, it isn’t the opinion of the IPCC per se, but rather that of Greenpeace. It gets worse.
IPCC ‘considering sending mirrors to space to tackle climate change’I've blogged on that very thing before: We will build the largest patio umbrella known to man to save the Earth!!!

