|Did Lacis et al try to turn the control knob up to 12 out of 10?|
The links for the article are http://www.tswj.com/2012/761473/ and the journal itself - http://www.tswj.com/contents/
Emeritus Faculty, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 0200, Australia
Academic Editor: Donald H. Stedman
Copyright © 2012 Timothy Curtin. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
This paper tests various propositions underlying claims that observed global temperature change is mostly attributable to anthropogenic noncondensing greenhouse gases, and that although water vapour is recognized to be a dominant contributor to the overall greenhouse gas (GHG) effect, that effect is merely a “feedback” from rising temperatures initially resulting only from “non-condensing” GHGs and not at all from variations in preexisting naturally caused atmospheric water vapour (i.e., [H2O]). However, this paper shows that “initial radiative forcing” is not exclusively attributable to forcings from noncondensing GHG, both because atmospheric water vapour existed before there were any significant increases in GHG concentrations or temperatures and also because there is no evidence that such increases have produced measurably higher [H2O]. The paper distinguishes between forcing and feedback impacts of water vapour and contends that it is the primary forcing agent, at much more than 50% of the total GHG gas effect.
Read More at Scientific World Journal...That means that controlling atmospheric carbon dioxide is unlikely to be an effective “control knob” as claimed by Lacis et al. (2010).