“swirling around emails purloined from the climate research”
Other than in the first sentence the author stated something as fact that is both unproven and speculative.
The Greenland ice cores (actual science)prove that the rise in CO2 started 800 years BEFORE the industrial revolution.
This alone debunks man made global warming.
Actual data shows global cooling over the same period that climate models predicted warming. ACTUAL READINGS, NOT GUESSES shows the exact opposite of what actually happened.
This alone debunks man made global warming.
Climate scientists caught cherry picking data, massaging data to match their agendas, then destroying the original data so others (peers) can't review their work.
If you were right, why would you have to CHEAT?
This alone debunks man made global warming.
Now you don't need to give me a hundred examples of supposed warming proof, just DISPROVE what I just said above. Then we'll talk.
To the model (computer) 200 million years is no different computationally than 10 thousand years, thus it is completely bogus, we mean completely bogus, for any model to be limited to the recent few thousand years.
When one comes to realize this, one comes to see how truly biased (or ignorant) those who make AGW claims on the basis of models confined to recent era's are. Conversely if a GCM does indeed reliably repeat the climate and CO2 fluctuations over the last 200 million years starting from a set of initial conditions, and shows an incongruity associated with recent anthropogenic CO2, then and only then will it be of concern.
How obvious is it?
Johnny Suntrade, The Suntrade Institute
"the science is in" - Barack Obama