The Climate Skeptic is free to question whether Earth's atmosphere is as sensitive to CO2 as many, many climate scientists say it is, but questions alone don't make for a compelling argument. What he writes here is a straw man: to make an effective case, I need an explanation of why the climate may be "tougher" than models show.

This blog post from a well-known climate change skeptic outlines some of his main objections to the scientific consensus that man-made carbon emissions are causing a global warming. The author provides a detailed argument against that 'anthropogenic theory', which he claims is largely based on incorrect climate models, and assumes a higher climate sensitivity to CO2. But opposing viewpoints are presented as 'alarmist' and insufficient context is provided in this narrow view of the controversy - though the author makes an effort to not demonize scientists, as other conservative critics have done.

This article explains exactly why we should take the current scientific "consensus" with a grain of salt. As we emerged from our "Little Ice Age" during the nineteenth century, we began for the first time in human history to record accurate, worldwide temperature readings, and yes the Earth has warmed during the past two-hundred years. The author explains in great detail why it may be much too hasty to assume that this warming is mostly due to human activity (specifically CO2 output), and he provides considerable empirical data to show that catastrophic global warming theory is based on improbable feedback assumptions. I was impressed that the author does not ascribe venal motives to those who have promoted the anthropogenic ... More »

The article is slightly interesting in showing the thinking of a skeptic with a slightly greater amount of data referenced than is seen in the usual blather. As an extreme minority view in the world of climate science, a peer review by a more respected scientist would be useful in dissecting the arguments he has put forward.

An excellent exposition of what is wrong with the IPCC predictions of climate doom. The IPCC predictions are built on a foundation of sand using models that generate a climate not resembling the earth's according to Kevin Trenberth, important scientist. The IPCC assumes that warming can only be explained by CO2 and then they think up reasons why there isn't enough warming.