Because wind. CFC molecules are not so heavy that they aren't well mixed in the atmosphere. After all water vapor molecules are quite light compared to N2 and O2. How come they don't immediately head for the stratosphere. The atmosphere isn't quiescent enough for significant stratification of the gases in it. As far as traveling to the South Pole, it's not necessary. The ozone layer has thinned out over the whole globe because of ozone depleting substances like CFC's which makes it easier for the hole over the South Pole to develop.

Not if they're doing their jobs right anyway.

Of course. They cause a 2 or 3 year dip in temperatures. I was just responding to the GP's implication that volcanoes are a significant factor in the current increase in CO2.

That's not something you've ever heard me say. Exxon hires a bunch of scientists (geologists, chemists, etc.) and I have no reason to think that any of them are doing that. The statements from the corporate spokespeople are another matter. But from what I know about Exxon's position it's an admission that AGW is happening but we can adapt as we go.

It's kind of an example of what I was talking about. Even if 1 or 2 Exxon scientists are found to be faking it doesn't mean the whole bunch are.

You know, it's the ones who get caught "faking data, fudging data, faking entire studies and seeking confirmation for their bias" who are the ones you hear about mostly. There are (probably) 100's of scientists for each scientist caught who don't make the news because they didn't do any of those things. If you let the few exceptions like that color your views of the whole field you come away with an erroneous opinion that does no good.

How much of that government funding is spent on big ticket items like building, launching and collecting data from satellites, or maintaining and collecting data from a large network of weather stations, or deploying and collecting data from 3,600 ARGO floats? Those are things that someone like Exxon are unlikely to fund for any reason yet the information they collect is quite valuable.

How about a tat on your tit?

For some reason your comment made me think about Malaysian Airlines Flight 370 and the search for it. Maybe it'll be 100 years before someone finds it and it'll be a new archeological find.

No, none will be precisely right and if one is it's just a coincidence. As George Box famously said "All models are wrong but some are useful." The model results you see in the IPCC WG1 reports are actually a composite of many different model results averaged together. Those results are likely better than any individual model since each model has it's strengths and weaknesses.

Confusion, I don't understand your point. Climate models by their very nature aren't expected to be particularly accurate on 10 year time scales. If they happen to be it's just a coincidence.

It doesn't matter when a climate model was created. You can run them for any time period regardless.

Keep in mind that when I say they work on a 30 year average you're going to have to wait until 2029 to determine what the actual 30 year average for 2014 is so you have something to compare to climate model output.

If you're wondering where the 30 year time period comes from it's defined as the classical climatological period by the World Meteorological Organization and thus is the standard period used by climatologists. It might be a bit arbitrary but you couldn't shorten it by more than 2 or 3 years without starting to run into problems caused by short term variability.

It's not likely that volcanic or tectonic activity has much of anything to do with it. Even the largest volcanic eruption of the past 100 years, Mt. Pinatubo in 1991 emitted only 42 megatonnes of CO2, only 0.2% of the 23 gigatonnes emitted by human activities that year.

A little more critical thinking would be in order. It's not the absolute change which is something life can adapt to but the rate of change which can cause a lot of devastation before life has the time to adapt.

I've got anecdotes too. Here in the pacific northwest it's been a hot, dry summer. IIRC twice as many days of 90 F or above than normal.

Your laughter just shows how little you understand the truth in that statement.