@Ant,

<< your comment about me being like Sgt Schultz>>
Sorry Ant, I wasn’t saying you were like Sgt Schultz. I was saying that Steele was. I was only asking if you wanted to line up with him.
You come across as being relatively open minded. The points you make are no doubt valid but if is not up to non-believers to explain away every piece of "evidence". It is up to the believers to show their case is *water tight*.

The telling point about the question of the hiatus is that those who claimed to operate according to scientific principle –like Steele & co --(earlier on) dodged any questions about it and did everything they could to disparage anyone who even raised them.

____________________________________
@ Poirot,
This Poirot shooting herself in the foot again:
“[it is] pointless to discuss climate change around here with deniers purveying junk-science peppered with ad hominem”

Knock knock, what is “denier” if not the biggest ad hominem of all!
(it’s rather telling that some are so used to using that term that they no longer see it as ad hominem)

_____________________________________________
@Warmair
<<Frankly your views on climate change are politically tainted. It is clear from some of the links you provide that you will uncritically accept any link which supports your view point>>

I don’t use any link to support “my view point”—I link to them to see if you have reasonable answers. And what I am seeing, from your side, is a mighty lot of sidestepping and attempts to browbeat.

warmair, I'm not surprised that climate deniers don't particularly like Weatherzone.
Continually seeking weather reports has been a constant activity when going up into the mountains or going out to sea after weather reports online became readily available.
I use Weatherzone, Willy Weather, BOM and barometre. I have found Weatherzone is quite accurate in what it forecasts. Deniers would not like how temperature and rainfall are compared to the long term average and monthly averages, on a daily basis.

Ant
Actually I see the climate change forum has been closed down on weatherzone but the site was well know for supporting climate change denial. I understand that the owner is skeptical about climate change.

SPQR
I have no problem with the last link you put up re the hiatus I can not say the same for most of the links that Leo has come up with.

hot-air/quote..<<..OUG
The staring-point is an observation
otherwise there-is nothing/to explain.>>

dear hotfart/the observations begin with a thesus
the thesus-ists man made warming/or cooling or sfc/or man-made ozone holes or nuke-tests in our atmosphere/and ya got nuthin/the thesus is refuted/any obsERvations are too biased

its insane/now yoU revealed your ignorances on science method/to feign knowing by putting uP a link[because i know your lots links have a habit/of chaNGING AND DISAPPEARING OR OTHER MODIFIERS LIKE HIDE/THAT/GREENFART

YOUR THESES/LACKS Quote
scientific method
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Scientific+proof

BUT/FOR A LAUGH/LETS SEE/YA LATEST GUESS

<..The principles and empirical processes of discovery>>

you lot got no principles/ya no sooner get revealed fake/than ya put up the next lie/ya lot are making it up as you go/plus you got no idea why/clearly you missed what happened after monkton.

point being hot/liquefied air..warmists got no concept of truth
do your self/a favour..compare your predictions[ie ya balked model/bliNG]
COMPARE YA 'PROJECTIONS/FROM 12 YEARS AG0
//YOU LOT CANT KEEP..YA TIMING TO ya lies

no princiles/no discovery[in fact
hide the data/seems the go]

so lacking in science methheads/..<<.and demonstration>>

lol

lol

lol

demo/you lot can demonstarait all ya like/but ya ONLY/got..demo/nodel/bling

NON WARMIST-demons demon /straight..that..<<>.considered characteristic of or necessary..for scientific investigation,>>

AND HOT/warmist-air/head-BOTT
CANT EVEN..GET THAT RIGHT

tell me airhead
/whats/the characteristic...of\or/nessisity for*
the 187 billuion wasted on this warming/cooling hot fart smell/hell

<<..generally involving the observation of phenomena,
the formulation of a hypothesis concerning the phenomena, experimentation to demonstrate the truth or falseness of the >>

please advise re steps you feel VALIDATE//your.<<>>hypothesis, and a conclusion that validates or modifies the hypothesis.>>>

god made too many fools
BUT HEY THATS WHY THEY GOT SCHOOLS.
trouble is idiots are thinking their know/it-all"s.
its insane/trying to reasin with hot airheads/and useless ants/SPOUTING PURE ROT.

ok ya get YA TAX/GEE ITS HOT
how come the tax didnt fix it?
ITS PATHETIC YOU THINK ARGUING WITH ME IS GOING TO CO0L THE EARTH
at least while your ere your not wasting others time.

keep talking to the hand/your links dont even work/at time of posting/let alone when we sue all those who/lied.

SPQR, you say it "... is not up to non-believers to explain away every piece of "evidence"."
Much of what is written by disbelievers just amounts to "Nuh" without any explanation. Politicians talk about the need for debate on many matters; but there is no debate when the response is virtually just "Nuh". All the points about conspiracies of one sort or another really just amount to "Nuh".

To suggest fraud has taken place goes beyond "Nuh" and needs proper evidence that it has happened. There have been a number of reviews in relation to "climategate"; nobody has been found to be guilty of fraud as a result. Now I guess there is a conspiracy in relation to a major cover up, just nonsense.

As warmair said the matter of hiatus is a real point.

Any Agency with the name "Institute" is suspect as they push a particular political view eg IPA. There are Labor Think Tank examples as well.
Any references from Goddard, Watts and Monckton will not dent the arguments of those who believe in climate change; it is known that there are major flaws in what they present.
Watts has been caught out in alleging temperature was mishandled in the US. It was taken seriously and reviewed, and Watts was found to be completely wrong. I have raised the matter of volume and extent elsewhere in relation to sea ice; you need to do mental somersaults to get around that one.

The Tobacco Industry fought off the knowledge that cigarettes causes lung cancer and a number of other health issues for years.
The Tobacco Industry is part of Heartlands and techniques learnt from the Tobacco Industry are now employed against climate scientists and citizens; such as, obfuscation, cherry picking, discredit those who push climate science, and projection.
Be suspicious of books written about science, as books provide a way to get around peer reviewed content.

no/warming..17-years/10\mths
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/07/03/rss-shows-no-global-warming-for-17-years-10-months/

Apollo Astronaut:declares/Climate Alarmism
Is the ‘Biggest Fraud/in the Field of Science’

http://cnsnews.com/mrctv-blog/craig-bannister/apollo-astronaut-climate-alarmism-biggest-fraud-field-science

Climate alarmism is "the biggest fraud in the field of science" and the 97% consensus claim is nonsensical, Apollo 7 astronaut Walter Cunningham tells MRCTV in a preview of his presentation at the upcoming Heartland Institute climate conference, July 7-9.

"Since about 2000, I looked farther and farther into it," Col. Cunningham (USMC, Ret.) tells MRCTV in an exclusive interview. "I found that not one of the claims that the alarmists were making out there had any bearings, whatsoever. And, so, it was kind of a no-brainer to come to the conclusion."

Cunningham rejects the notion of man-made climate, not only as fact - but also as even qualifying as an actual "theory":

Another Antarctic sea ice record set – but excuses abound

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/07/02/another-antarctic-sea-ice-record-set-but-excuses-abound/

Today Cryosphere reports 2,112 million km2 more sea ice around Antarctica than normal.

Reality is that we right now have an area matching the size of Greenland of extra sea ice floating around Antarctica. The nightmare for the global warming believers is if the growing ice around Antarctica should be linked to cooling, and so:
1) Some Re-analysis papers and more have been made showing that the ocean around Antarctica is not cooling (as original data suggests) but is in stead warming fast.
2) Several mechanisms have been suggested to argue how come ice can grow so much faster when in fact the water is supposed to have warmed up.

http://investmentwatchblog.com/the-ndaa-explained-in-3-minutes/
natures going to bite
see what man/can mAKE/NATURE UNMAKES
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q8W1ql2P9dY
regardless of how much tax or insuance tAxation/they extract
http://investmentwatchblog.com/hurricane-arthur-intensifies-as-it-heads-for-north-carolina-category-3/

catch22=screwu
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/NSA6/clear.jpg

THESE/GUYS/GREENIES-HIGH/ON\WARMING/buzzz
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2680519/Global-warming-creating-MORE-glaciers-Antarctic-sea-ice-reaches-record-high-climate-change-scientists-claim.html

http://investmentwatchblog.com/nasa-launches-satellite-to-observe-earths-breathing/