I'm not sure that that is necessarily a valid test. One might be able to discern a long term trend in the presence of high frequency noise. You can accurately determine the average value of a number of measurements, even if the variation between measurements is high. Likewise, trending can accurately be identified. Anyone who has successfully taken a course in introductory statistics should be aware of this.
The problem with global warming theory go much deeper. The entire enterprise reeks of pseudoscience and politics.
The entire enterprise reeks consists of pseudoscience and politics.
And having been introduced to some statistics back in the Pleistocene, I'm aware of its predictive utility.
Hence I can predict - with a very low MOE - that you're well aware of the point that was being made.
Nor will I belabor the points already made by others re the staggering number of variables that are at present but poorly understood.
Not to mention those of which there is currently little or no awareness whatsoever.
Who but an uber-gullible individual would put much confidence in those who, while presuming to dictate national policy/expenditure for decades or centuries to come,
lack the requisite technology/expertise to accurately predict a 70° day w/.3" of rain on April 14th ?
And as that about uses up my writing quota for a Sunday, here's hoping your afternoon trends well d:^)