Trenberth认为如何选点对结果影响太大，因此，这个方法是不可靠的。另外认为C如果不是常数，这个方法也不适用。这里，对第一点，最大的可能性还是二氧化碳不是温室效应主要原因，因此反馈因子随不同原因而变化，例如，报告中提到了太阳辐射强迫的效应比二氧化碳效应小。当前大气二氧化碳浓度的增加速度非常高，这时候，实测数据还不能反应二氧化碳的效应，这就充分说明二氧化碳效应的反馈效应分析是很成问题的。对第二点，报告中认为二氧化碳加倍引起的反馈效应因子的变化并不很大，不存在C变化大的问题。

Trenberth 通过选取数据，让模型AMIP计算结果与模型一致，从而认为模型是没有问题的。这首先说明，Trenberth承认了这个方法是对的，而且根据观测数据得到的反馈是负反馈，但是，报告采纳的结果是正反馈。其次，气候模型是基于大气动力学，本身湍流效应就使结果不可靠（参见后面6.5节），通常调整模型参数，很容易得到变化很大的不同数据。

The new findings give confidence, the researchers say, that other, newer satellites expected to launch starting early this year will measure total solar irradiance with adequate repeatability – and with little enough uncertainty – to help resolve the long-standing question of how significant a contributor solar fluctuations are to the rising average global temperature of the planet.

Prior to the 2007 IPCC report, it was appropriate for the null hypothesis to be that “there is no human influence on climate” and the task was to prove that there was. The burden of proof is high. In general in this case, scientists assume that there is no human influence and to prove that there is requires statistical tests to exceed the 95% confidence level (5% significance level) to avoid a chance finding of a false positive. To declare erroneously that the null hypothesis is not correct is called a type I error, and the science is very conservative in this regard about making such an error. Scientists are thus prone to make what are called type II errors whereby they erroneously accept the null hypothesis when it is in fact false.