Raypierre and also Chris (comment 29) noted that «sceptics» should not just magically forget about or omit the established greenhouse gas physics when trumpeting exotic solar explanations for current warming. (realclimate.org)
In any case, proper accounting of the dominance of oscillations over at least the short - term course of surface temperatures means that the solar explanation can not be easily dismissed. (wattsupwiththat.com)
If Schmidt and Muscheler want to dismiss a solar explanation for late 20th century warming by invoking the highly speculative assumption that GMAST is a good proxy for ocean heat content over with the 20th century, that fine. (wattsupwiththat.com)