ok show the links then. if we did it... I pointed out your link admitted the energy budget is speculation.
this is why no one believes your crap anymore. you present speculation as science. there could by myraid reason the upper atmosphere changes temperature. this article explains/suggests the upper atmosphere temps has a strong correlation with where the earth is in relation to the sun. http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/04/...-is-de-coupled-from-the-surface-temperatures/ http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/04/...-is-de-coupled-from-the-surface-temperatures/
The degree of the energy imbalance is uncertain, the energy imbalance itself is certain. Go back and follow the links yourself, and go the last page, as you claimed you did but apparently did not.
I've been saying goodbye to barrier beaches and coastal salt marshes for a whole month now! When are they leaving??
Big Banks Call For 'Strong' Climate Deal Without government action, they say, private investment won't be enough. Ben Walsh Business Reporter, The Huffington Post Posted: 09/28/2015 12:05 PM EDT "NEW YORK -- Six big U.S. banks called for a "strong global climate agreement" in a statement Monday, with Bank of America, Citi, JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley and Wells Fargo arguing in a joint release that government action, in addition to private business investment, is needed to address climate change. "The banks said that putting a price on carbon emissions is crucial to increasing investments in clean energy. The right policy frameworks, they wrote, "can help unlock the incremental public and private capital needed to ensure" that the estimated $90 trillion in new infrastructure investments projected over the next 15 years will help reduce, not increase, carbon emissions. "The next round of United Nations climate talks will take place from Nov. 30 through Dec. 11 in Paris. This series of talks has dragged on for years without yielding a significant deal, but as Reuters' David Stanway reports, the 2014 agreement between the U.S. and China means that "a global deal in Paris has become much more likely" -- although Stanway also notes that the individual country targets that have been laid out so far are not as ambitious as many countries would like to see. "The banks' statement adds four major financial institutions to the list of U.S. businesses that support a deal in Paris. "As U.S. negotiators enter climate talks in Paris, they can say with confidence that the business and financial community in this country is ready for government leadership to address climate change," said Mindy Lubber, president of the nonprofit Ceres, in a statement Monday. "In July, 13 major U.S. companies, including Bank of America and Goldman Sachs, signed a White House statement in favor of a Paris deal. Politically, support from the business community could help to undercut the argument that economic growth and reducing carbon emissions are mutually exclusive goals. "Still, no matter what the country's major banks say, it's not clear whether they'll persuade many Republican lawmakers to get on board with addressing climate change -- especially if those lawmakers are facing primary challenges from tea-party types and already feel insecure about holding on to their seats. It's also far from certain whether the business community can do much to change the anti-climate-action views of conservative lawmakers who have won congressional seats in recent years."
The clowns who want to make billions off the carbon trading market support the "climate change" agenda. This is hardly news - the banks are seeing a bunch of green.
And the energy sector makes billions off the status quo. Which is why energy company position statements on AGW oppose these... oh, wait.
Actually I don't disagree with your statement. However all this shows is that "climate change" policy has very little to do with science but is primarily driven by politics and money.
It is the presence of our atmosphere that makes the difference in addition to the difference from the Sun between the two planets. The latter affects the amount of solar radiation stored by absorption during the day that is dissipated at night. What is called the greenhouse effect is quite important. For example in the desert when the relative humidity is extremely low it can get very cold on a clear night. The weak greenhouse effect of CO2 remains, but the stronger greenhouse effects of water vapor and clouds are noticeably absent. On a still night. The denser cold air settles at lower altitudes and vertical circulation between the Earth's surface and the Stratosphere is lessened because solar radiative heating of the Earth's surface is absent, though there remains a lessened differential temperature and density between low and higher altitudes, the source of vertical currents. local differential solar heating is absent , the source of horizontal winds, and the air tends to be still. Mercury does not seem to enjoy these features of the Earth. Our deserts would be less cold at night were CO2 a more efficient greenhouse gas, or if there was more of it.