(1). The sun is getting hotter, and brighter in
Summer. Many people around the world notice the sun feels hotter on their skin. This anomaly will produce deadly events in the future.

http://www.appinsys.com/GlobalWarming/GW_Part6_SolarEvidence.htm.

(2). The moon is continuing to move away from the earth 3.8 cm per year. Click on website (2A) read last sentence in figure10. I don’t know the total distance the moon has traveled away from the earth, at this point.

http://www.uni.edu/morgans/astro/course/Notes/section4/new17.html.

(3). The earth is developing a breach in its magnetic fields. The earth’s magnetic field is showing signs of collapsing. This anomaly will produce deadly events in the future.

http://www.redorbit.com/news/space/1611923/themis_project_discovers_breach_in_earths_magnetic_field/

(4). The earth has tilted on its axis 26.0 degrees beyond normal, and the tilting of the earth axis is worsening. This anomaly will produce deadly events in the future.

http://divulgence.net/axis%20shift%202.html.

(5). The earth’s magnetic poles are continuing to reverse at 40 miles per year.

http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2003/29dec_magneticfield/

(6). The earth’s rotation is continuing to slow down. Due to the earth tilting on its axis.

http://bowie.gsfc.nasa.gov/ggfc/tides/intro.html.

(7). The earth is wobbling on its axis, and the wobbling is continuing to worsen.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandler_wobble

(8). Both polar ice caps are being melted by the sun during each polar ice caps summer season, due to earth’s orbit destabilizing. The oceans are rising. This anomaly will produce deadly events in the future

http://polaricecapsmelting.com/two-effects-of-polar-ice-caps-melting/

(9). The northern hemisphere, and the southern hemisphere are experiencing rare winter tornadoes. Due to the earth’s orbit destabilizing. The website proves the temperature in winter is rising. It should be too cold for tornadic activity in winter. Rare winter tornadoes are not rare anymore.

(A).http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/nationnow/2012/01/southern-storms.html

flawed in many ways.

The air tight transparent enclosure didn’t
allow air to flow, or circulate as it does in earth’s upper, and lower
atmosphere. The transparent enclosure not only retains the heat, it accumulates
heat, and causes the temperature to rise within the enclosure. This was not
noted in the experiment.

For example: Sit in a car with the windows up on a hot sunny
day. When the temperature in the car reaches 100 degrees fahrenheit row the
windows down. You will notice a dramatic temperature decrease. The enclosure of
the car, like the air tight transparent enclosure in the greenhouse gas
experiment retains, and accumulates heat. The environment of earth is similar
to a car with the window down. This fact was over look in the experiment.

In the experiment there’s an equal volume of
air, and CO2 in both air tight transparent enclosure. The temperature in the
enclosure with CO2 was higher, than the enclosure with air, but in earth’s
atmosphere CO2 only represent a small percentage of the gases that make up the
air we breathe (0.0383%). During the
experiment the transparent enclosure CO2 levels should have better represented
the CO2 level in earth’s atmosphere (0.0383%). There is not an equal quantity
of air, and CO2 in earth’s atmosphere. The experiment was conducted improperly.

Nitrogen (N2) 78.084%

Oxygen (O2) 20.946%

Argon (Ar) 0.934%

Carbon dioxide (CO2) 0.0383 %

Neon (Ne) 0.001818 %

Helium (He) 0.000524 %

Methane (CH4) 0.0001745 %

Krypton (Kr) 0.000114%

Hydrogen (H2) 0.000055%

You know that your airplane is traveling over the ground at 100kts. But you also know you have a head wind of 10kts. If there was no wind how fast would the airplane be traveling? Yes. 110kts.

Same with global warming. The temperature over the past 50 years = 100% of known warming. But known mechanisms like solar irradiance have been falling and should be acting to cool the planet. If that cooling is 10% then the resulting man-made GHG warming would account for 110% of current warming. If solar irradiance had been increasing (it hasn’t) and accounted for 10% warming instead of cooling then the human contribution would be 90%.

Is it that hard to comprehend?

Your post was not about SkS, so why should I respond to that subject? Will you delete my posts if I try to defend the work done at SkS? You say you will at the end of the post. That’s another reason not to say anything about SkS.

That natural signal is not the baseline. The baseline is some point on the actual observed temperature record, the result of all forcings. Let’s call it X. The actual observed temperature at some given point is Y. Y – X = Z. Z is how much above or below the baseline Y is. When we talk about attribution, we can say that some forcing is responsible for 100% of Z.

Let’s call the natural signal, as defined above, A. We have a situation where X does not equal A. A is less than X. In other words, if global temperature were based on just natural forcings right now, it would be lower than the baseline. Thus, human-sourced forcings are responsible for more warming than the 100% of the trend above baseline.

It would be better if everyone would talk about trend above natural, but that’s not easily communicated to the public. The public wants to know “how much above what I’m used to?” It’s also a useless thing, because discarding the baseline makes trend above natural = 100%.

See
Huber & Knutti (2008) — http://thingsbreak.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/anthropogenic-and-natural-warming-inferred-from-changes-in-earths-energy-balance.pdf

Foster & Rahmstorf (2011)
http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/6/4/044022

Pasini et al. (2012)
http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/7/3/034020

. . . among many others.