LEGO
<Of course you don't want to discuss Manne's fraudulent graph because you have probably figured out you are on a loser. I won't discuss your links because you are still refusing to discuss mine.

OH you sulky baby, I haven't even BEGUN to attack some of your first graphs yet you twit! You're rotating so fast through your own crap you've slipped in your copious verbal diarrhoea and don't know which way is up.

When you learn how to post ONE graph, I'll think about answering it. But you STILL haven't answered my replies to your last graphs, so how many times do I have to play fetch as you throw out retarded Red Herrings? It's not MY fault you're so easily taken in by your favourite song! It's not MY fault you just "Believe" retarded Denialists like Tony Heller when he says climate alarmists are hiding older megafires before the 1980's because your such a gullible shmuck you don't know to CHECK this retarded junk! It's not MY fault you believe there's a conspiracy that includes every National Academy of Science on the planet, and that only REAL heroes like Tony Heller are telling the truth... except when they're found to be not. And it's not MY FAULT YOUR A DAMN CLICHE OF A DENIALIST WHO HAS TO TAKE THE PRESSURE OFF YOUR PRECIOUS TONY HELLER BY ROTATING AGAIN!

Ian Plimer? Sorry son, but you're rotating through your arguments again before our last ones are really dealt with. Explain why your retarded Steve Goddard / Tony Heller lied about older 1980's fire data? Maybe he didn't lie, and just forgot to check? In that case, he's a dumbarse and why are you spreading his material? Maybe he lied? In that case he's a dishonest dumbarse and you're not only letting yourself be conned but are trying to con others — so should we trust you either?

To Mr Opinion. You are claiming that the scientific debate is over. Since your statement is not a generally accepted premise, one might have thought that you would provide some evidence to support your claim? I maintain that the scientific debate is not over at all, and I provide this link to the so called "Oregon Petition" in which over 31,000 US scientists have signed a petition which refutes the idea of HIGW.

http://www.petitionproject.org/

In my opinion, scientific opposition to HIGW intensified after the publication of the IPCC's infamous "Hockey stick graph" invented by climatologist Robert Manne. According to Emiritus Professor of Geology Ian Plimer, Manne's graph which air brushed out the entire Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice age flew in the face of thousands of historical records. His graph, published by the IPCC in 2001 was very effective in frightening the public to accept HIGW, and the graph became the poster graph for the IPCC. But unfortunately for the IPCC, it created a storm of scientific opposition from scientists, who refused to give it credence.

Opposition to HIGW is growing, because the hysterical predictions of climate scientists or their spokesmen, or media echo chambers have not arisen, and the public knows it. Coastal real estate prices have not crashed, the Arctic is not ice free, the polar bears did not drown, and Miami, London, new York, and New Orleans are not 3 meters underwater. Perhaps your mommy never read to you the story of "the Boy Who Cried Wolf"?

If climate scientists and their spokesmen make stupid claims of impending doom which will happen in the very near future, and the future comes and nothing happens, you can hardly blame to the public for thinking that climate scientists simply don't know what they are talking about. Concerns about HIGW today rate as lowly among the public as concerns about trans gender toilets and the adoption of genderless pronouns

Hi Max.

I was very surprised when you demonstrated the skill of picking out an individual graph on a page full of graphs, and providing a link to it. I didn't know such a feat was possible.

I still will not respond to your links unless you respond to mine. I have submitted my most important links to you at least five times now, maybe six, and you still refuse to even look at them. You and I both know it is because you are frightened that they will completely destroy your entire HIGW position. Your latest excuse, that you will not look at them until I figure out how to post links to individual graphs, simply confirms to our readers that you are not prepared to debate in good faith. If you had posted the information as to how I could copy your method, that would have restored a lot of credibility to your claim that you are trying to debate in good faith.

Next you are whining about my changing topics. Your problem is, that I have had 15 years experience in dealing with debaters like yourself who refuse to make the most obvious connections, who deliberately cause misdirection's by demanding I validate everything while they validate little, and who argue from a position they already know is wrong. So I know how to play the same game.

So the best way to counter your dishonest position, is not to try and convince such an opponent he is wrong. Because their entire self esteem relies on the idea that they are uniquely intelligent sentient beings. The best thing is to really address my posts to the audience, and ALTRAV and Hasbeen have both expressed appreciation for my posts.

Since you will not respond to my posts, I am going to post up another one for the amusement of ALTRAV, Hasbeen, Fester, and loudmouth2. It relates to Michael Manne's infamous Hockey Stick graph and the civil prosecution of columnist and noted wit, Mark Steyn, who published an article labelling it a fraud.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yEBeF_Rz1MU

LEGO,
>I was very surprised when you demonstrated the skill of picking out an individual graph on a page full of graphs, and providing a link to it. I didn't know such a feat was possible.

So you provide a wall of graphs, and I choose one and you don't like it? Oh, diddums. That's kind of my point! I'm not responding to a wall of graphs. Try to grow up a little and not just sound like the lawyer from The Castle saying "It's the Vibe of the Thing!"

In the meantime, chew on this. In 2006 Michael Mann and his team proved the original 1999 Hockey Stick graph 'wrong'. There are indeed a few minor fluctuations, as I said a few posts back. But although the stick has a few wobbly bits, the overall shape is still the same!
______________________________

The new reconstruction has been generated using two statistical methods, both different to that used in the original study. Like other temperature reconstructions done since 2001 (see graph), it shows greater variability than the original hockey stick. Yet again, though, the key conclusion is the same: it’s hotter now than it has been for at least 1000 years.

In fact, independent evidence, from ice cores and sea sediments for instance, suggest the last time the planet approached this degree of warmth was during the interglacial period preceding the last ice age over 100,000 years ago. It might even be hotter now than it has been for at least a million years.

Further back in the past, though, it certainly has been hotter – and the world has been a very different place. The crucial point is that our modern civilisation has been built on the basis of the prevailing climate and sea levels. As these change, it will cause major problems.

Read more: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11646-climate-myths-the-hockey-stick-graph-has-been-proven-wrong/#ixzz6CeAheNVk

LEGO, thanks for that comical enlightenment adding to the already quite humorous state of affairs surrounding the debate and mis-information around GW and CC.
Steyn does a good job of explaining the ridiculousness of this whole saga.
I'm not quite sure what all the fuss is about, if we all agree that the earth is a cyclic entity, all we can argue about is what harm, if any man-kind has done to the planet.
To that end, I have continually contended that the answer is; NONE!
The one, and possibly most relevant thing I note, that was broached but not responded too, was the question of "who is funding this"?
Now as far as I am concerned, THIS is the only question and topic we should all be asking/discussing/researching.
The answers would shock more than just a few people.
But like every good scam instigated by the very wealthy elite, we will never know, because money buys a whole lot of silence and science.

Max, I've got news for you;
It's been CHANGING from when the planet was originally formed.
There is no knowledge or bar as to what the NORM is, in any of the factors surrounding the planet and it's make-up.
So just accept that whether it's every 1000, or 10,000, or 100,000, or 1,000,000 year cycles, it is what it is and cycles they are, so if we humans had life spans of thousands of years instead of barely 100, we too could confirm the cycles the planet lives by.
Oceans, like temperatures will rise and fall just like they have done for millennia.
All you have to get your head around is that WE have done so little and insignificant harm to the planet, that it's not even worth measuring.
So I would suggest not wasting your time on some scam which was designed to benefit a few greedy, sick and twisted very wealthy degenerates, who unfortunately were so wealthy as to evade the gas chambers, which is too subtle an end to such bastards