He makes some extraordinary statements:
Due to natural variability, trends based on short records are very sensitive to the beginning and end dates and do not in general reflect long-term climate trends.
You can see this for yourself by comparing the trend from mid-1997 to the trend from 1999 : the latter is more than twice as large: 0.07 instead of 0.03 degrees per decade.
|Sks Trend Calculator|
an astute observer might note that australia is hitting record high temperatures
The BoM much trumpeted claim that 2013 was our hottest year is less than robust because some global climate groups disagree (link)
- GHCN CAMS finds that 2005 was a hotter year than 2013.
- RSS satellites finds that 2005, 1998 and 1980 were hotter years than 2013.
- UAH satellites finds that 2009 was a hotter year.
your graphs are bull****. they come from bull*** sources that do not do peer reviewed work that is published in actual scientific journals like Science.
you jokers have a lot of hide. the actual scientists are busy doing the hard work of counting tree rings and drilling ice cores, and you insult them by saying their entire life's work is some communist conspiracy,What? The ice-cores that show temperature rises before CO2?
Then he resorted to the much rebuffed BigOil argument and shamelessly linked it to the tobacco industry using the shameful term denialist:
THERE. IS. NO. DEBATE. except that manufactured by the denialist industry, funded by big oil money, in the same way that doubt was 'manufactured' by the tobacco industry to delay action against their own insanely profitable ventures.
As usual, the ad hominem argument shows itself to be a singularly pathetic tool to sort out reality — like sifting sand with a hammer, or chopping wood with a fork, it’s the true choice of the confused.
As Steve Milloy says: Enviro double standard on funding, Exxon bad, Shell Good.
When I asked
Can you point to ONE thing wrong in the original post?He couldn't! He then resorted to more inanities and swear words.