The Achilles Heel of global warming theory

The scientific and mathematical details of Viscount Monckton's paper may be beyond the layman; however this paragraph near the end stands out and is comprehendible to all:

"It is of no little significance that the IPCC's value for the coefficient in the CO2 forcing equation depends on only one paper in the literature; that its values for the feedbacks that it believes account for two-thirds of humankind's effect on global temperatures are likewise taken from only one paper; and that its implicit value of the crucial parameter κ depends upon only two papers, one of which had been written by a lead author of the chapter in question, and neither of which provides any theoretical or empirical justification for a value as high as that which the IPCC adopted." (Emphasis Added)

So despite supporting thousands of scientists with billions of dollars every year to study "Climate Change", the values used as input data for the three critical computer-numerical parameters governing Al Gore's "Consensus Model" of the "Green-House Effect" are very, very thinly sourced -- probably "cherry-picked" -- and thus of highly suspect reliability. Even though the IPCC's diagnosis of the patient is supposedly alarming, in effect, no second opinions were sought to double-check whether "the planet has a fever".
The scientific and mathematical details of Viscount Monckton's paper may be beyond the layman; however this paragraph near the end stands out and is comprehendible to all:

"It is of no little significance that the IPCC's value for the coefficient in the CO2 forcing equation depends on only one paper in the literature; that its values for the feedbacks that it believes account for two-thirds of humankind's effect on global temperatures are likewise taken from only one paper; and that its implicit value of the crucial parameter κ depends upon only two papers, one of which had been written by a lead author of the chapter in question, and neither of which provides any theoretical or empirical justification for a value as high as that which the IPCC adopted." (Emphasis Added)

So despite supporting thousands of scientists with billions of dollars every year to study "Climate Change", the values used as input data for the three critical computer-numerical parameters governing Al Gore's "Consensus Model" of the "Green-House Effect" are very, very thinly sourced -- probably "cherry-picked" -- and thus of highly suspect reliability. Even though the IPCC's diagnosis of the patient is supposedly alarming, in effect, no second opinions were sought to double-check whether "the planet has a fever".