Nature can, selectively, buffer human-caused global warming, say Israeli, US scientists

I will second what goldminor says:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
William McClenney…very nice!!!
To jai mitchell,
The problem is climate scientists have Green House Gases on the brain and everything looks like a nail because they have that hammer however there is a heck of a lot more going on in climate then just green house gases.
We know the effect of CO2 does not continue in a straight line. link
The problem is the calculated effect of moving from 300 ppm of CO2 to 390 ppm is only 1.4 W/m2 or 1.1 °C increase in temperature and more CO2 will have even less of an effect. CAGW was based on water vapor amplifying the effect but reality does not bare that out. Everyone uses numbers for solar insolation like 428 Wm2 but the actual energy is between 1360.5 Wm2 and 1362 Wm2. That is what hits the earth’s atmosphere and interacts with it.
The variable sun was supposed to be constant but more and more data is coming in showing that while TSI may not vary much, the energy at different wavelengths does and the actual effects are not well know. For example albedo was decreasing and then started increasing around 1997-98 link 1997/1998 was the big El Nino and also the start of solar cycle 23, not a particularly strong cycle link and also Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics Two solar cycles of nonincreasing magnetic flux 23 OCT 2002

Some of the variations that SIM has measured in the last few years do not mesh with what most scientists expected….
…ultraviolet irradiance fell far more than expected between 2004 and 2007 — by ten times as much as the total irradiance did — while irradiance in certain visible and infrared wavelengths surprisingly increased, even as solar activity wound down overall. [end of cycle 23]
The stratosphere absorbs most of the shorter wavelengths of ultraviolet light, but some of the longest ultraviolet rays (UV-A), as well as much of the visible and infrared portions of the spectrum, directly heat Earth’s lower atmosphere… NASA

Meanwhile the climate has switched gears and we are getting more meridional circulation. This brings up the lazy sun==> Δ UV ==> Δ ozone or Δ solar wind ==> BREWER-DOBSON CIRCULATION
In times of low solar activity the upper atmosphere cools ( NASA mentioned the ‘collapse’) and the down welling of cold interacts with the up welling of warm. This interaction enlarges to the point the rotation of the polar vortex to the point it becomes unstable and we get a Polar Express like the USA has been experiencing. MUCH better explanations: Sunspots, the QBO, and the Stratosphere in the North Polar Region – 20 Years later
Also:

…In a winter cyclone the primary driver of the dynamics is the baroclinic instability in the winter circulation, with the storm extracting vorticity from the latitudinal shear in the circulation, and converting it to the vorticity of the cyclone. The effective diabatic heating associated with precipitation and reduced cooling of entrained air amounts to an increase in potential vorticity and uplift in the air mass, and is likely to concentrate the vorticity near the cyclone center. In addition, by enhancing the feedback processes inherent in the baroclinic instability, it can increase the overall vorticity of the cyclone. It has been demonstrated analytically by van Delden [1989] and from numerical storm simulations by Zimmerman et al. [1989] and Mallet et al. (1999) that a positive feedback exists between the storm dynamical configuration and the diabatic processes. Thus precipitation changes explain the many reported examples of correlations of the vorticity area index (VAI) with GCR flux change and Jz reviewed by Tinsley [2000]….
http://www.utdallas.edu/physics/pdf/Atmos_060302.pdf

Then move down to the Antarctic. If you look at this Sea Surface Temperature map it has a good image of the tongue of cold water from the Antarctic Circumpolar Current just before Drake Passage, headed up the coast of South America to Galapagos.
fhhaynie, a retired EPA scientist says

If I were asked to pick a single point on earth that most likely has the greatest effect on global weather and climate, it would be 0 and 90W (Galapagos). This is where El-nino winds, the deep sea Cromwell current, the Panama current, and the Humbolt current meet. These flows are not constant and each has different cycles and those cycles are not constant. Cycles on cycles create extremes in weather and climate. These extremes have an effect globally. I suspect these cycles are also controlling our observed atmospheric concentration of CO2. CO2 is very likely a lagging indicator and not a cause of climate change.

So what happens in Drake Passage if the sea ice continues to expand in the Antarctic? Feb SH Sea Ice Graph The westerlies, the prevailing winds between 30°S and 60°S, in the Southern Hemisphere have been observed to have intensified significantly over the past decades. (from 2008) Will more ice cause more water to be headed up the coast of South America as the current is driven into the restriction of Drake Passage?
Research on Drakes Passage today: http://climate.gmu.edu/research/drake.php

…The experiments address a fundamental question of how the circulation of the ocean works. Since the global overturning circulation is apparently sensitive to wind even in regions where the ocean has eastern and western boundaries, it may be influenced by wind outside the Drake Passage latitudes. However, our results indicate that the unique geometry of the Drake Passage latitudes does make the global circulation – and perhaps the climate of the North Atlantic – especially sensitive to wind there.

(Cold Antarctic water runs up the coast of Africa too.)

“The polar wind is mainly varying with solar UV flux, since it controls the ionization rate and photoelectron production in the ionosphere. Therefore the polar wind is sometimes referred to as photothermal outflow (Moore and Horwitz, 2007). The auroral outflows, on the other hand, are enhanced during active times, when the solar wind-ionospheric coupling is strong. Since the
solar wind energy input shows larger variability than the solar radiation, the auroral wind is much more variable than the polar wind. Nsumei et al. (2008) have shown that solar illumination controls the plasma density over the polar caps mainly at low altitudes (below 2.5 RE), whereas it is controlled by the geomagnetic activity at higher altitudes (above 4 RE).”
http://uu.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:210978/FULLTEXT01

Climate Scientists have been so focused on CO2 (and their grant money) that very little has been done to research the oceans and the sun. The next coming decades with a lazy sun will hopefully wake scientists up and a lot of good research will get done. And I hope like heck William McClenney doesn’t get proved right during that time!

They’re not altering the positive feedback mechanism, but rather the way the global system reacts, redirecting the moisture to the Indian Ocean monsoon, etc., at low levels, opening the TTL “window” to OLR.