Warmist, warmist greetings and apologies...we throw eggs, they throw in the towel...

...when Al Gore famously declared that "the science is settled" over AGW, eggs were thrown by the sceptics. All landed on target. (Al Gore's face.) We now have what amounts to a series of admissions of defeat from the warmists...
Firstly a Canute like pledge to somehow limit global warming to 2 degrees C, and reduce emissions by 50% by 2050, and now an acknowledgement that computer projected climate change/global warming is based on shonky science, and that warming is not expected to resume until "roughly 2020".

All of which suggests that warmists are and always have been merely speculating about global warming/climate change, and that prior predictions of climatastrophe based on computer modelling were, as sceptics have always said, mere hot air...

From the warmist site RealClimate......We hypothesize that the established pre-1998 trend is the true forced warming signal, and that the climate system effectively overshot this signal in response to the 1997/98 El Niño. This overshoot is in the process of radiatively dissipating, and the climate will return to its earlier defined, greenhouse gas-forced warming signal. If this hypothesis is correct, the era of consistent record-breaking global mean temperatures will not resume until roughly 2020...Nature (with hopefully some constructive input from humans) will decide the global warming question based upon climate sensitivity, net radiative forcing, and oceanic storage of heat, not on the type of multi-decadal time scale variability we are discussing here. However, this apparent impulsive behavior explicitly highlights the fact that humanity is poking a complex, nonlinear system with GHG forcing – and that there are no guarantees to how the climate may respond...an anguished commenter then asks......How do I answer the sceptics/deniers who utilise the cooling since 1998, matched with the trend lines in the IPCC reports that show warming climbing while the reality is cooling or at least flat lining?(Ergo the IPCC is a crock and therefore every thing relating to AGW is also a crock?)Here in Australia the deniers loaded this question onto Senator Steve Fielding, fresh back from the USA on a “fact finding mission” to the Heartland Institute, Sen Fielding then used his vote in the Senate to block the ETS bill.If El Nino is put up as the reason why doesn’t the the forecast’s take that into account and show it???...and......Thanks for the post Kyle. I hope you’re wrong though, because the thought of 10 more years of the deniers screaming (increasingly loudly) about how global warming is a bunch of not happening BS is a bit more than I for one can take. They could really use this to very damaging political advantage, weakening proactive action just when it’s most needed.

...leading Anthony Watts (WuWT) to observe...Imagine, twenty-two or more years (1998 to ~2020) of no new global temperature record. What would that do to the debate?...uncertainty is a far better reason for justifying action than overhyped claims to certainty, or worse, claims that any possible behavior of the climate system is somehow “consistent with” expectations. Policy makers and the public can handle uncertainty, its the nonsense they have trouble with......I think I hear the fat lady singing...