LudwigVanQuixote,

RE: #125:

You must be the Glenn Beck of LGF. Anyone who starts with name calling is usually compensating for another weakness. WUWT is not a propaganda. They ask probing and challenging questions and note the reams of data which counter the AGW theories (which after a decade of cooling are now all busted).

I will challenge you to prove how scattered, unverified and uncalibrated temp sensors around the world could even hope to measure a single global temperature within a tenth of a degree, let alone define ‘normal’ with such shoddy data. And I will challenge you to prove that a temperature record for the entire planet is available to a tenth of a degree back to the 1880’s, let along 1000 AD.

LOL! I mean really. What is the average normal temperature for the 20th of October across the USA for the last ten years within a tenth of a degree? Prove you have this solved to a point equivalent to measuring gravity (a real scientific fact) in a repeatable manner to such precision. I would be impressed of you could prove you had defined the temperature against ‘normal’ for today!

Ludwig Beck, I have spent years learning science, regardless of what your Jehdi Mind Tricks tell you. The Peer Review process for scientific journals is nowhere near robust of the quality required to lay a sewer to EPA codes. I understand their focus and ingenuity, but until they have gone through the type of scrutiny and challenge lipstick has to go through before it goes to market it is farce.

So you think Darwin, Edison, Einstein and Newton went through peer review???

LOL! And you claim I am ignorant of science and the scientific method! That’s rich.

See you Glenn