Well, Rocks, picking the start of a Century is a pretty justifiable starting point. The assertion made above is that there were no models that predicted this.
To help with the modelers predictions, they might have used the 11 year solar cycle which is pretty steady in its repitition.
Or, as an alternative, they might have used the CO2 progression which is always up.
Ripple screen and harp music takes us inside the head of a climate modeler:
"Hmmm... If CO2 causes warming, then the temperature will always go up. If the Sun causes warming, the temperaure will go up and down depending in the TSI from the Sun. If we get funding to prove that warming is caused by CO2, what should our model show?"
A third option would be to use the millions of factors that influence climate. This is an interrelationship which they do not understand and cannot model. I guess that one's not up for consideration. That brings us back to CO2.
One thing is certain: If CO2 is the primary cause in the models, then funding will always go up.
If I'm a modeler, especially in this economy, I know what my model will show.
Rocks, do you know of any model that showed a 10 year temperature drop starting at any point from 1998 forward?
