0.40 -> 0.36 -> 0.26 -> 0.22

Nature Lover, you said: “Are you denying the data from Hadley, UAH, and even GISS? The data from these AGM proponents shows that temperatures are decreasing.”

Here is a series of twenty numbers. Please state whether you think this series is decreasing or increasing:

0.32
0.35
0.39
0.40
0.36
0.26
0.22
0.33
0.39
0.42
0.51
0.53
0.53
0.48
0.56
0.64
0.65
0.68
0.67
0.72

After you state whether you think it’s increasing or decreasing I’ll say what the series is (but you can probably guess!)

That was when I came up with the tactic of never pointing to a graph, instead pointing to the underlying numbers.

Simply present the NASA GISS data (or Hadley, or whatever) as a string of numbers – e.g. annual temperature anomoly, smoothed in some simple way – and ask the denier if the series is going up or down.

Even they find it hard to claim that 2.3 is lower than 1.8!

Did accidentally I drift into some kind of private club where members are expected to post off of a script?

[snip]

I’m sure you wouldn’t want others who stumble upon your site, friendly people with newer information or knowledge different from yours, to accidentally get the wrong impression about your club and post scary new progressive ideas.

[Snip.]

[JR: My apologies, Nature Lover, I left out the phrase "long-debunked." I don't allow long-debunked disinformation in comments because either I have to waste time debunking it again -- and the deniers win by wasting my time -- or I don't, and then people who "stumble upon" my site are left reading undebunked disinformation. As the TOU clearly state: "Although CAPAF has no obligation to monitor the Submissions, you acknowledge and agree that we may do one or all of the following: (a) monitor the Submissions; (b) alter, edit, or remove any Submission; or (c) disclose any Submissions."]

But gee, Nature Lover, they’re not as smart as you. Please give them a call and let them know they’re wrong, so we can all breathe easier.

http://www.remss.com/msu/msu_browse.html

Who is the “denier” here? Are you denying the data from Hadley, UAH, and even GISS? The data from these AGM proponents shows that temperatures are decreasing. This means that your statement is false.

Either C02 is PARTIALLY masking an otherwise drastic cooling that would have taken place over the past twenty years, or whatever joules are provided by our CO2 blanket are insignificant in the context of Nature’s variability and other modes of energy radiation. One or the other. Warming is not a choice as warming is not being observed on a planetary scale.

By the way, if I am the “denier” and I am denying a categorical falsehood, I certainly don’t feel denigrated by your labeling! I am interested to know if your label is a power trip, an attempt to make me feel bad, or if it is just a way to dehumanize my point of view so it’s easier for you to deal with? I’m just curious.

Humans change temperature on a microscopic level every day from the clothes we wear to the windows we open or close to the parking lots we pave and the fields we irrigate. I don’t deny that, but then I don’t think that is bad. But that is not global.

We are not driving the global or local climate with human CO2 emissions, at least to any extent that can be measured. Do you have any credible evidence to the contrary? Do you really have calculations that contradict NASA, UAH and the Hadley Center??? I would be amazed, but if you have your own monitoring network and normalizion software I am open to seeing your data. We know the CO2 is in the air, we just can’t find the heat! If you have found it, for goodness sakes, don’t keep it to yourself.

[JR: You are a denier because you deny well-established observations and climate science. "We are not driving the global or local climate with human CO2 emissions, at least to any extent that can be measured." That is disinformation. It is what makes you a denier. NASA and Hadley data both prove we are warming -- indeed, NASA and Hadley have both made clear that is what their data shows. UAH data is controlled by deniers, so it is hard for me to take seriously. By the way, the temperature data is but a SMALL part of the data that shows GHGs have been altering the climate. Try reading the IPCC reports some day. But if you keep posting disinformation -- I'll have to start moderating your nonsense. Thems is the rules.

You should feel bad spreading disinformation, but I find few deniers do, so that is not the point of using the word. It is a simply an accurate description. Nothing more, nothing less. I personally prefer the term delayer, but it didn't take. But I'm happy to call you a delayer if it makes you feel better.]

The near certainty of causality represented in the Summary for Policymakers is not present in the science summarized by the WG1 report, rather it is a “selected” certainty that is only possible when a small group of proponents dismiss contradictory publications and viewpoints in favor of a pet theory.

Meanwhile CO2 production and temperature are travelling in opposite directions, leaving those who claim CO2 to be responsible for things like forest fires and drought cycles and unhappy children on Independence Day to look a bit emotionally/religiously attached to their dogma. Or just young and ignorant of the climate cycles Nature has always produced.

But most people don’t learn about “climate change” from the science or scientists, or from the most basic source, observation. They learn from their favorite blog, celebrity, politician, “journalist” or headline and don’t question much beyond the popular viewpoint. End-of-of-the-world stories have always been socially-derived fantasies. Always. Their propagation has always been made possible by natural human imagination/entertainment/fear and has been fueled by those seeking wealth or power.

Human nature hasn’t changed. Nor has Nature.

[JR: If this is your idea of "love" then I suspect "Nature" wants a divorce. The climate cycles were produced by outside forcing -- the Sun, natural greenhouse gases. Now we are driving the climate with human emissions more than Nature ever did. Temperatures keep going up, just like GHGs, no matter how many times deniers say otherwise.]