Your point about policy is good, but if he is correct then that would mean geoengineering policies would become more attractive than lowering emissions (since l

Your point about policy is good, but if he is correct then that would mean geoengineering policies would become more attractive than lowering emissions (since lowering emissions would have a limited effect and is very hard). I agree with the BS asymmetry. I don’t put this article in that category since he seems to have a clear hypothesis that explains the current record warming that is much higher than IPCC predictions. If the IPCC models are significantly wrong, this is important to know. He has tried to contact climate scientists but he hasn’t got very far and I don’t think it’s because he’s schizo. No worries about the tone, I understand the frustration. And to be clear, I don’t want more science per-se, but I worry we might be doing bad science.