Thread Bear
Good diagram. It is very scary when you start to dig to find just how much research is going into this field. Last weeks INQUA conference, looking just at climate change during the period 2.5 million - 11,000 years ago had over 1,100 scientists attend to present their research. This is only a small proportion (probably <10%) of the total number of climate and atmospheric scientists working on cliate change. Wading through the scientific output is a major challenge!
Unfortunately, the ozone conclusion that you highlight, although highly relevant, is not a conclusion about overall heating as ozone is just one of a range of greenhouse gases.
My feeling is that the key conclusion of the IPCC report in relation to aviation is this one:
http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc/aviation/008.htm
The climate impacts of different anthropogenic emissions can be compared using the concept of radiative forcing. The best estimate of the radiative forcing in 1992 by aircraft is 0.05 Wm-2 or about 3.5% of the total radiative forcing by all anthropogenic activities. For the reference scenario (Fa1), the radiative forcing by aircraft in 2050 is 0.19 Wm-2 or 5% of the radiative forcing in the mid-range IS92a scenario (3.8 times the value in 1992)
In other words, the best estimate is that aircraft are responsible for 3.5% of the anthropognic greenhouse effect, rising to about 5% over the next 50 years or so.
ORAC - fair enough. In my view the ways in which journalists 'misinterpret' fact is scandalous.
DrDave