*************************EXCERPT***********************************
John Shade says:
There is the possibility here of a new bootstrap event. According to this post Real Science (http://www.real-science.com/understanding-man-global-warming) In the year 2000, Hansen and his buddies decided to give underachieving global warming a boost by adding 0.6 degrees on to the disappointing US data set. So perhaps the above claim of a rise of 0.8C thanks to his work at the Goddard Institute for Space Studies is a bit of an exaggeration. In either case, the bootstrap event whereby an observer gets extremely distressed by the data he has just created is worthy of further study.
*******************************EXCERPT**************************************
Wherever paleo-climate studies have looked on a regional basis Antarctica, Greenland, Tibet you find 2-3 degree Celsius changes with a beat-frequency of about 1000 years some of these rises are very steep (Greenland) within decades and this is quite normal throughout ice-ages and interglacials. This probably translates to a global 0.5-1 degree shift.
The current warm period is expected on this frequency and not at all unusual in rate of change or amplitude despite the presence of higher levels of CO2 and other greenhouse gases. Hansen has consistently misinterpreted the natural signal as confirmation of his models and calculations of sensitivity to carbon dioxide. If, as many of us calculate from the real world evidence of radiation flux measurements, CO2 can account for no more than 20-25% of the warming, then future temperatures will be determined by the natural cycle and many paleo-climate experts think this will turn downward (see Lius work on Tibet featured in an earlier thread).
What is so annoying is the way that the left-liberal-green press only ever report Hansens opinions thus inflating the carbon currency bubble.