You are DENSE!<quoted text>
You stated: We don't know everything doesn't mean we know nothing.
But knowing that you don’t know everything should keep one from saying that we definitively and unequivocally know that manmade CO2 emissions will bring catastrophic damage to the planet. By not knowing everything, there is no way to predict outcomes, as can be seen especially from the Met Office.
From your link, it states this:
The purpose of this report is to assess the significance of the current pause and its potential
causes, using observations and simulations with STATE-OF-THE-ART CLIMATE MODELS….The current pause in global surface temperature rise is not exceptional, based on recent model simulations.
But yet the Met Office in 2007 said this:
Here is the climate forecast for the next decade; although global warming will be held in check for a few years, it will come roaring back to send the mercury rising before 2014. The new model developed at the Met's Hadley Centre in Exeter, and described in the journal Science, predicts that warming will slow during the next few years but then speed up again, and that at least half of the years after 2009 will be warmer than 1998, the warmest year on record. Over the 10-year period as a whole, climate continues to warm and 2014 is likely to be 0.3 deg C warmer than 2004.
And the Met Office said this in the same article:
Earlier computer models attempted to make projections up to 100 years into the future and to do this only needed approximate information on the current state of the Earth's atmosphere and oceans, since the biggest effect comes from global warming. But their predictions were relatively uncertain over around a decade. The new model developed by a team led by Dr Doug Smith can make these shorter term predictions SIGNIFICANTLY MORE ACCURATELY because it incorporates information about the actual state of the ocean and the atmosphere today, so it is possible to predict both the effects of natural factors, such as changes in ocean circulation, and those caused by burning fossil fuels.
The Met Office never predicted a pause for this time period with their significantly more accurate climate model. So all of their prior climate models have predicted wrong outcomes and now I’m supposed to believe this new state-of-art climate model actually gives out accurate predictions?
Here’s the problem….your link states this: The scientific questions posed by the current pause in global surface warming require us to understand in much greater detail the flows of energy into, out of, and around the Earth system. Current observations are not detailed enough or of long enough duration to provide definitive answers on the causes of the recent pause, and therefore do not enable us to close the Earth’s energy budget. These are major scientific challenges that the research.
So if there is little understanding of the details of flows of energy into, out of, and around the Earth system, how does a climate model come even close to being accurate?
It is the CO2, fool!
Read again my previous post.