Ant you must be a fellow traveler, if not a fully funded passenger on the gravy train. If not you must be so naive as to probably have trouble combing your hair in a mirror.

There is just so much evidence of doctored data, only a fool or someone with their eyes wide shut would not see it.

Take the latest doctoring by GISS.

They have announced warming in Paraguay, & their current corrected figures show this. Of course the emphasis in on corrected figures. When you pull up the old figures, you find they have adjusted the recorded figures for the 40s, & early 50s arbitrarily downward by, would you believe 2.5 degrees C. Now that is a sure way to get the angle of the graph running the way you would prefer.

Our own illustrious BOM did the same thing with the official temperature for Darwin a couple of years back, by a full 2 degrees. I don't know how they expect to get away with this stuff long term, too many people have the old unadulterated records for that, but I guess the people involved will be retiring soon, & don't really care.

Obviously the only people who fail to smell a rat in these record announcements are those who have blocked their nostrils up with the wet cement of ideology, & are determined to ignore the stink at all costs. The real question is, what other than research grants do they expect to get from it?

The oceans are alkaline, not acidic, With a PH of about 8. As Aidan points out, there has been no acidification of the oceans, merely a lowering of the PH, making them slightly less alkaline, but certainly not acidic.

The assertion of “acidification” is another element of the climate fraud.
http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com.au/2014/12/acidification-gate-noaa-accused-of.html

Science shows that human emissions have no measurable effect on climate, and the nonsense about lowering emissions is not only baseless but would be detrimental to the civilized world, if it could be effected.
As a recent OLO article showed, we need a higher, not lower proportion of life supporting CO2 in the atmosphere

Global warming has stopped, despite the proportion of CO2 in the atmosphere, which the fraud-backers predicted would cause warming. http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/10/02/its-official-no-global-warming-for-18-years-1-month/

Ant has demonstrated her support of dishonesty in the past, but I thought that Rhosty had more sense than to back the climate fraud.There may be good reasons to advocate the technology to which he refers, but lowering of CO2 emissions is not one of them

Hasbeen, LeoLane; I wrote about how various environments are showing that warming has been happening. You obviously do not have any answers.
Quote from my original post "But, regardless of any dispute about temperature, the environment has certainly provided evidence that temperature has been high." A number of examples were then given showing the impact temperature was having on the environment.
In relation to acidification I gave a couple of quotes where it has occurred.
Watts is a very poor reference he is not a scientist and has been proven wrong a number of times.

I notice leo you are just as abusive as in the past; your comment was once again quite sexist. When you need to personally attack it displays a lack of argument.

Maybe Leo you need to have a peak at a chemistry site or textbook to understand the relationship between CO2 and salt water; I gave a practical example of where acidification is happening in a previous post

Leo Lane,

<<The oceans are alkaline, not acidic, With a PH of about 8. As Aidan points out, there has been no acidification of the oceans, merely a lowering of the PH, making them slightly less alkaline, but certainly not acidic.>>
That's like saying "Canada is cold not warm. As Aidan points out, there has been no warming of Canada, merely a raising of the temperature, making it slightly less cold but certainly not warm."

<<The assertion of “acidification” is another element of the climate fraud.
http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com.au/2014/12/acidification-gate-noaa-accused-of.html >>
One piece of research into ocean acidification may possibly be fraudulent (though I don't regard a one sided report as sufficient proof of that). But you seem to have failed to comprehend that there is a lot more to the phenomenon than one piece of research.

<<Science shows that human emissions have no measurable effect on climate,>>
There's a very big difference between "an effect that's difficult to measure accurately" and "no measurable effect". Human emissions have the former.

<< and the nonsense about lowering emissions is not only baseless but would be detrimental to the civilized world, if it could be effected.>>
Multiple orders of magnitude less than the cost of doing nothing.

<<As a recent OLO article showed, we need a higher, not lower proportion of life supporting CO2 in the atmosphere>>
Asserting something isn't showing it!

<<Global warming has stopped, despite the proportion of CO2 in the atmosphere, which the fraud-backers predicted would cause warming. http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/10/02/its-official-no-global-warming-for-18-years-1-month/>>
Last year was measured as the hottest on record. What evidence would convince you that global warming has not stopped?

Aidan, you must have a different interpretation to these words than I have "...Washington’s Blue Ribbon panel that was organized in the Pacific Northwest to address OA after shellfish seed stock crashed due to more acidic waters affecting the hatcheries." Nothing ambiguous about those comments.

The Republican Party has acknowledged that climate change is happening. If I was doing the denier trick I would leave out the proviso that they do not believe man is to blame. It is a step towards reality; they would miss out on donations if they were to acknowledge any involvement by man.

A Watts blog proves nothing, Aiden.

ant, I suggest you read it again. Your post is misdirected: I was quoting Leo.