Quote Originally Posted by santafe2
You have to be talking about temperature or it's not about warming / non warming. The atmosphere is about flat and so is the upper ocean. But there is a huge volume below the surface of the ocean and that area is apparently warming. We're just two people talking on a forum. Winning here doesn't matter. Getting it right does matter. Either the world is still warming or it isn't. The latest research shows that that warming is moving into the deeper ocean. That concerns me. The ocean is vast. A minor warming in the deep ocean may result in a major atmospheric warming.
Several issues with the above statement:

1) that the deep ocean is warming. This is far from proven given that the records are extremely sparse.
2) that the deep ocean, if it is warming, is warming due to CO2
3) that the deep ocean, if it is warming, and if the warming is due to CO2, will affect surface temperatures directly

The problem I have with listening to Trenberth is that he is looking for warming. People who look for something, will find it even if it isn't real.

My view, as I've noted again and again, is that time will tell.

The problem, of course, is that many are pushing for action now even before there is time to tell.

Quote Originally Posted by santafe2
The idea of misdirection is political. Almost no one working in science cares about directing people. They care about the science. Why would anyone devote their life to science if they have a political and or business bent? There is way more money in business and politics than science. Please be honorable enough to defend this flat temperature meme when the next atmospheric spike happens.
This statement is both obviously proven wrong in public example, and disingenuous to the extreme.

I've posted numerous examples where so-called objective scientists have evinced very clear political beliefs and advocated for political actions based on their so called objective work.

James Hansen has stopped even pretending to be a scientist, and is now a full time agitator. Stephen Schneider made numerous public comments about how the public needed to be 'steered'. James Holdren, our present 'science czar', equally has all sorts of political views and desires quite in conflict with his supposed position as objective scientific advisor.

Thus to say that 'most' people working in science don't care about directing people - this may be true.

It isn't true in climate science.

Quote Originally Posted by santafe2
We could parse this idea to death and bore every reader on iTulip in the process. Spencer agrees with Trenbreth. In science possible and sound are not so far apart.
Uh, not exactly. Spencer is saying that Trenberth could be right.

Trenberth, however, refuses to return the courtesy.

Quote Originally Posted by santafe2
Over time one of us and the scientists we follow will be proven incorrect. In my book, Spencer is a decent guy but not too smart. I'm sure you feel the same way about Trenbreth and others that I respect. Time will tell.
I do hope that over time, the truth of the matter will arise. I also note that again you attack Spencer personally rather than the work he has (or has not) done.

My view, unlike yours, is much less sanguine about that possibility.

CAGW has promulgated such a long series of misleading, overhyped, or just plain wrong views on such areas ranging from hurricane and tornado frequency and intensity, to snowfall levels, to rain levels, to drought levels, to higher temperatures, to lower temperatures, to diseases, to starvation due to crop failure, and on and on that frankly the entire business reeks.

And in the vein of the first point: the ongoing record for consecutive days since a Cat3 or greater hurricane landfall in the United States is still going strong: 2751 days and counting...

Tornadoes: record low number in the past 12 months after the previous rash of tornadoes...