In a similar way, I calculate that a reduction in the amount of CO2 by half, or a gain to twice the amount, would cause a temperature change of – 1.5 degrees C, or + 1.6 degrees C, respectively.

In these calculations, I completely neglected the presence of water vapour emitted into
the atmosphere. This acts in two ways: In part, the water vapour reduces the radiation in
the same way as does the CO2, whereby the absorption of CO2 comprises a larger fraction
of the earth’s radiation then if the water vapour would be removed from the atmosphere.
In part, the temperature causes an increase in water vapour emitted into the atmosphere, on account of an increase in the quantity of CO2, with the subsequent rise in temperature.

To estimate these two influences, one has to envisage the heat absorption of water vapour,
both in respect to the Earth’s radiation, as well as with respect to solar radiation.

We know far less about the heat absorption by water vapour than we know about heat
absorption by CO2. Ekholm has researched all the present observations to calculate the
absorption of terrestrial radiation by water vapour. The main material is provided by
Langley’s observations regarding the absorption of heat radiation of the moon at various
water contents of the atmosphere. The water content corresponds to an irradiated water
layer of 0.72 – 5.0 cm thickness. For this amount of water vapour, Ekholm found, while
assuming a warming increase of 15 degrees against a black background of - 80 degree
radiating black body, an absorption of 33 resp. 66.4 %. When calculating the absorption
of smaller amounts of water vapour, Ekholm used Bouguer’s formula. This calculation
could be regarded as justified by the analysis of Fowle* if Langley has used a sufficiently
small gap (according to Fowle 10”-15”). This does not seem to be the case. In any case,
the radiation groups included in Langley’s tables had a width of 15 arc minutes. There is,
therefore, no doubt that a use of Bouguer’s formula on Langley’s data produced too high
an absorption at high water vapour content, and on the other hand, produced too low
and absorption at low water vapour content of the atmosphere. Tyndall’s findings*, that
the smallest amount of water vapour sufficed to elicit a strong absorption of radiant heat,
are in contradiction with the results of the application of Bouguer’s formulas used with
Langley’s data.

2016 was Australia's fourth-warmest year on record (the national observational dataset commences in 1910). Australia’s area-averaged mean temperature for 2016 was 0.87 °C above the 1961–1990 average. Maximum temperatures were 0.70 °C above average, and minimum temperatures were 1.03 °C above average. Minimum temperatures were the second-warmest on record behind +1.16 °C in 1998.

The 11-year mean temperature for 2006–2016 was the second-highest on record at 0.56 °C above average. Only one year in the past ten was cooler than average (2011), and seven of Australia's ten warmest years have occurred since 2005.
Sea surface temperatures (SST) in the oceans around Australia were also very warm during 2016, with the annual mean SST the warmest on record at 0.73 °C above average, surpassing the previous record of +0.64 °C in 2010.

The warmth around the north and east coasts of Australia brought a record-warm year for several of Australia’s major cities. Darwin and Sydney had their warmest years on record for both maximum and minimum temperature, whilst Hobart had its warmest nights on record and warmest annual mean temperature, and for Brisbane the annual mean temperature was warmest on record. It was the equal third-warmest year on record for Canberra annual mean temperature. Perth had its coolest year since 2005. Adelaide was a little warmer than average, and most sites across metropolitan Melbourne were warmer than average for the year.

The Australian climate in 2016 was influenced by a combination of natural drivers and anthropogenic climate change. The pattern of above average temperatures over land and in the oceans reflects the background warming trend. In the Pacific, the El Niño which had commenced in 2015 transitioned to neutral conditions during autumn 2016, and weak La Niña-like patterns over winter. In the Indian Ocean, water to Australia’s northwest continued to be warmer than average, and a strong negative Indian Ocean Dipole developed during the year.

Annual mean temperatures for 2016 were above to very much above average for the majority of Australia, and record warm for the tropics and parts of the east coast and southern Tasmania. Temperatures were cooler than average for an area of southwestern Western Australia.

Overall it is a clear trend of warming. Don’t see no natural variation—natural variation is just an excuse deniers like Lees, roach, Gregg come up with.

They will never name any possible force causing natural variation because there aren’t any that explain a trend of over 150 years of warming.

It isn’t the sun that is causing the warming—while the globe warmed since the 1980s the sun was quiescent.
 

It is not orbital perturbations.


So—not natural variation.


It is us burning fossil fuels.


When the sun becomes more active temperatures will jump!

 

So it is good old CO2 and H2O all along

The effect of back radiation on Earth’s atmosphere is up to 200 times larger than that of CO2 and works in the opposite direction. Thus, if CO2 has any effect on atmospheric temperature and climate change we show it is negligible."

2016 was Australia's fourth-warmest year on record (the national observational dataset commences in 1910).

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 2^nd, 2017 at 10:21pm:


lee wrote on Aug 2^nd, 2017 at 3:30pm:


You have also said there is no natural variability. So what caused CO2 to provide 3 cool spots between 2000 and 2011?

Effect of CO2 on IR directed down to earth: