Interesting post from Spencer today.
What I find surprising is that he's acknowledging that if he is right, we can expect a 2 C warming for a doubling of CO2. He also acknowledges that this prediction is based on only 9 years of data, and so the real feedback may be significantly different (higher if the satellites are to agree with climate models).
Am I reading this right? Spencer went from saying we will have a completley negative feedback, to saying that feedbacks may cause the system to warm twice as much as we would expect from 2x CO2 alone. Is he teetering on the edge of being called an 'alarmist'?
