Dear Leo Lane,

Nice try you old coot but I'm a wise up to your shenanigans!

You see I was the one who asked you a question first and now you are trying to rewrite history and label me as the obfuscating one? Not having a bar of it I'm afraid.

Well it looks like Hobart has to get a run of 50C days then before that 'open minded' L.Lane will shift his opinion. I did predict as much. You remove science from the debate and you are left with opinion which you are perfectly entitiled to do. But in the end that is all it is, opinion, so please excuse me but I think I will ignore it.

Dear Cohendite,

You are next, mainly because the other kid in class has been so rude trying to butt in all the time.

I'm happy to stick with Wood for the Trees.

You posted the link;

http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/rss/from:1997/trend

to make the case that because the Lower Troposphere was apparently cooling then the case for Global Warming was broken.

But there was another data series for Lower Troposphere temperature trend in your drop down menu - UAH NSSTC and that was going up steeply.

http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/uah/from:1997/trend

In fact if we head down the list the following global data sets all revealed an upward temperature trend.

WoodForTrees Temperature Index - http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/uah/from:1997/trend

GISTEMP LOTI global mean - http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/gistemp/from:1997/trend

GISTEMP dTs global mean (extrapolated) - http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/gistemp-dts/from:1997/trend

HADCRUT3 variance-adjusted global mean - http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:1997/trend

HADCRUT3 unadjusted global mean - http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:1997/trend

HADCRUT4 global mean - http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1997/trend

Every single one of them showing an upward trend in temperature anomalies since 1997, something you have contended over and over again just isn't happening.

So why shouldn't the readers adjudge what you have done as one of the most spectacular examples of cynical cheery picking ever to grace this forum. Audacious doesn't cover it, it To be that blind to all the contrary evidence on a site you are using to make your case must almost be considered a form of mental illness.

No need to return my pill bottle any time soon.

Steele you say:

"Every single one of them showing an upward trend in temperature anomalies since 1997, something you have contended over and over again just isn't happening."

I have contended no such thing; I said RSS showed a 17 year hiatus in temperature trend with the others showing lessor periods; for instance my last comment states this:

"all the other indices show periods up to the present of no temperature increase for periods less than RS."

Read the link I provided to warmair about the Brozek and Stokes analysis, or bugger off.

Still no denial.

What an ass.

Thanks, Steele, you finally disclose a basis for your delusion.

Have a look at Robert Carter’s clarification of trends. You obviously are ignorant of it. I watched it when it first came out so was never at the disadvantage which you suffer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JpfMM3bVbhQ

Uploaded on May 7, 2011
An excellent presentation disputing man-made global warming using nothing but pure science and statistics by Professor Bob Carter (Australian geologist). It would be very difficult to dispute his facts. In this video he pretty much proves that over 10,000 years the earth has been cooling. Looking at shorter periods of time one can find what ever they want in the numbers. There have been many periods of rapid warming and cooling over this period.

He examines the data concerning climate change, Global warming, the problems with the idea that CO2 is driving climate change and global warming, & examples of the scientific data being ignored over populist views about CO2 causing climate change and Global warming;...the hypothesis fails the test.
You can finally clear your poor polluted mind, Steele.

Dear Leo Lane,

Would think far more highly of dear Bob if he wasn't being paid directly from the Heartland Institute, a right-wing think tank funded by the likes of the Koch brothers who are determined to protect their billions of dollars tied up industries directly impacted by a price on Carbon.

However here is dear coolist Bob in 2009;

“Nonetheless, by coincidence, growing recognition of a threat of climatic cooling is correct, because since the turn of the 21st century all real world, long-term climate indicators have turned downwards. Global atmospheric temperature reached a peak in 1998, has not warmed since 1995”.

Yet if we plug the year 2000 into Cohenite's link every single trend graph is upward.

What a clown.

Dear Cohenite,

Rubbish mate but let's go with that fantasy.

Anyway you wrote, “all the other indices show periods up to the present of no temperature increase for periods less than RS.”. What on earth do you mean? How much less? I tried them all from the year 2000 as stated above and all trends were up. How small do I need to go with the time period to see the artefact you claim is there? And why do you get to use the year 1997 for you graph but we are told we need to go with a smaller time scale for ours?

Lol. Not a good look my friend. It must get painful tying yourself up in all those knots attempting to get the figures to show what you want.

from the Heartland Institute, a right-wing think

Here we go again.
No wonder there is so much scepticism when that is the best response.
Really ?
The stupid thing is it is all irrelevant.
It does not matter whether global warming is true or not !