Examining the rest of the Deutsche Bank talking points.
This is a very lame argument. Nobody respectable makes that claim, and there are well established historical ties between long solar minima and cold temperatures – with a lag time of decades. It is too early to see any effects, if in fact we are entering such a period.
“Scientists studying sunspots for the past 2 decades have concluded that the magnetic field that triggers their formation has been steadily declining. If the current trend continues, by 2016 the sun’s face may become spotless and remain that way for decades—a phenomenon that in the 17th century coincided with a prolonged period of cooling on Earth.”
Skeptics 6, Deutsche 0
DB is going downhill fast now. Further increases in CO2 cause very small increases in LW absorption. The dispute about climate models is based on feedback, not LW absorption of CO2.
Skeptics 7, Deutsche 0
This is an implicit proof. Using the climate models to prove the correctness of the climate models. CO2 levels have increased by 40%, while temperatures have only increased by 0.7C. No where near their claimed numbers.
Two rows above they were making the opposite argument about delays – that solar effects should appear immediately.
Skeptics 8, Deutsche 0
Our rich coal deposits were formed during the Carboniferous Era from luxuriant growth – when CO2 levels were many times higher than current values. Why did they call it the Carboniferous Era?
Skeptics 9, Deutsche 0
Darwin explained quite clearly that the survival of species depends on their ability to adapt to change. The environment changes all the time, and always has.
Final score : Skeptics 10, Deutsche 0
I hope their investments in alternative energy work out for them, but they should avoid pretending to be doing science.