It's not settled science is it mjp?
Does not seem like it to me..
Thanks for your highlighting of this quote.
"
Dear all,
At the risk of overload, here are some notes of mine on the recent
lack of warming. I look at this in two ways. The first is to look at
the difference between the observed and expected anthropogenic trend relative to the pdf
for unforced variability. The second is to remove ENSO, volcanoes and TSI variations
from the observed data. (my highlight)
Both methods show that what we are seeing is not unusual. The second
method leaves a significant warming over the past decade."
I like this bit. "The second is to remove ENSO, volcanoes and TSI variations" So now when we remove negative forcing everything fits in with warming models. Well isnt that just dandy.
I found a Tisdale chart awhile ago on what global sea temps look like with the el nino spikes removed. Sure as hell make the temp charts look pretty flat. Can i do that now since you guys can remove negative forcings.
Now that you are cherry picking what natural forcings can be removed to show that in fact there is a warming.
Lets deal with your ludicrous net zero assumptions about the pacific.
Where do get that paper from..
All i see is global sst anomalies increasing. That just states that their is no net zero effect.
In looking for the Tinsdale )minus el nino chart which i have not located yet
I came across this from wuwt.
Basically a running total on yearly NINO 3.4 sst anomalies. No net zero effect seen here.
Certainly a nice match.
and another image on Period averages.. These show that there is 100% no net zero.