cohenite, you wrote ... “I'm not going to waste my time pouring over Lancet articles when the rag is a devout supporter of this nonsense” … now you have medical scientists involved in some kind of conspiracy. The Lancet is a very well respected medical Journal. As stated in another post, there needs to be some apparent trend before epidemiological studies are begun. The Lancet article was about a trend in increased encephalitis being noticed, it was then investigated.

The Canadian study found that Inuit were becoming ill due to inexplicable reasons. So those matters were studied by medical scientists as you would expect them too. Your response is pretty thin to say the least.
Scientists are saying that dengue fever is on the increase in areas impacted by greater rainfall. An increase of dengue fever has been identified in Asian countries and Australia. The combination being high rainfall, and mosquitoes. There has been a notable spike in the last year or so of dengue fever, should medical scientists, and entomologists etc study that spike, cohenite?
So we have two continents and the Oceania region having water borne diseases associated with climate change. Notice I haven't gone to the numerous studies that project various ailments being an issue due to climate change, but have gone to studies where spikes have occurred.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com.au/news/2007/09/070921-dengue-warming.html
http://www.abc.net.au/news/topic/dengue-feve

A great film clip in relation to Mr Watts; showing how a major project he pushed was completely wrong:

http://theaimn.com/2014/03/29/damn-the-nation-full-speed-ahead/comment-page-1/#comment-93032

Witless

you have outdone your own witlessness here, yet you claim others

' a bloke who has his hands clamped firmly over both ears, eyes scrunched tightly shut, intoning “la, la, la, la” for all he is worth.'

mate it is you who is looking into that looking-glass.

From cohenite's link http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/02/05/cryosat-shows-arctic-sea-ice-volume-up-50-from-last-year/

"While this increase in ice volume is welcome news, it does not indicate a reversal in the long-term trend.

It’s estimated that there was around 20 000 cubic kilometres of Arctic sea ice each October in the early 1980s, and so today’s minimum still ranks among the lowest of the past 30 years,” said Professor Andrew Shepherd from University College London, a co-author of the study."

This visual shows up-ticks as ice volume trends downwards http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WAMN3a6u91M

Surely cohenite is capable of conceding what is before his eyes. Why is it he only wishes to talk about up-ticks then, when it suits, the down-ticks in natural phenomena (or unnatural phenomena as alarm sounders would have it). When neither suits he invokes "natural variation".

ant, your energy is wasted. Best move on and argue your points with scientific skeptics, not with pretenders to being so

PS, on methane I do find this disturbing (derived from ant's link) http://arctic-news.blogspot.com.au/2013/02/dramatic-increase-in-methane-in-the-arctic-in-january-2013.html

My investigation into the IPCC position did not throw up the 2009-2013 sequence. If there is not an imminent a "tipping-point" in Arctic methane, at least its increasing chronic evolution should have been given prominence in the the last IPCC report, IMO.

Luciferase, anybody with an open mind will see that Leo and cohenite have not supplied references that stand up. The Andrew Bolt's article Leo provided a reference to, was a bit of a hoot. Very sad for the people of Tuvalu though, having water flood their homes. cohenite had no answers for the epidemiological matters that I raised ... he claimed medical scientists were unreliable.
My last reference in relation to Anthony Watts shows he does not provide reliable information, cohenite has used Watts a few times as a reference. I'm happy with the result, Leo and cohenite acted as strawmen.