EL NINO behavior:

[Karlis]

Climate models, which are based on the assumption that carbon dioxide has a positive feedback, i.e., that carbon dioxide causes significant warming, make predictions on the behavior of ENSO. An analysis of those predictions versus what actually happened shows that the climate models predicted almost the exact opposite of what really happened. Read more...

[Raptor Witness]

You can see how popular real thought experiments are here.

The entire "feedback" system is unknown. Many variables are unknown to science, I expect, or too subtle to be easily found.

The one thing that seems consistent in all the reading that I've done on this subject is the increase in extreme weather. If you have a closed system of any kind, and you pump in more energy by whatever mechanism, you're going to see some change, someplace. Can we predict what that change is? I don't think so, not yet anyway.

One thing that is obvious to me, is that this feedback mechanism appears designed to create stability, through the union of organic life and inorganic materials. This science is still in its infancy, but should we wait until we fully understand it? I don't think so. I think we should error on the side of caution, given what we have to lose.

Edited August 20, 2011 by Raptor Witness

[FurthurBB]

You can see how popular real thought experiments are here.

The entire "feedback" system is unknown. Many variables are unknown to science, I expect, or too subtle to be easily found.

The one thing that seems consistent in all the reading that I've done on this subject is the increase in extreme weather. If you have a closed system of any kind, and you pump in more energy by whatever mechanism, you're going to see some change, someplace. Can we predict what that change is? I don't think so, not yet anyway.

One thing that is obvious to me, is that this feedback mechanism appears designed to create stability, through the union of organic life and inorganic materials. This science is still in its infancy, but should we wait until we fully understand it? I don't think so. I think we should error on the side of caution, given what we have to lose.

This is a very reasonable post and I really appreciate that.