Jonathan, let's focus on the science and not on disputes about academic records etc. Even though I agree with some of the sentiments expressed by Daniel, this is not how one can discuss things.
I may well have been wrong about the factor 5. But my point all along is that to claim that X is not as warming as fast as the rest of the world you would have to detect a significant departure from the global rend. But what you have done is to try to detect a significant departure from a null trend. Failing that, you say that that's evidence that X is not warming as fast as the rest of the world. But that is not true unless your data places the global trend outside the, say, 95% confidence interval of what the trend at X could be.
Your objection seems to be that this is contrary to the scientific method. But that's simply false. We do have a lot of data that shows that the world is warming. And there is strong scientific evidence that it is linked to CO_2 emissions. You can say that maybe Australia is not warming. OK., but show that the data compels one to believe that. You cannot turn things around and say that just because a trend of zero is inside your confidence intervasl Australia is not warming. Especially not is the gobal trend on 0.6 ?C per century is also inside your confidence interval.
I'm not an expert in data analysis and I don't know a lot about how the trend of 0.6 ?C per century was measured. But it seems to me that this is visible only if you average over a lkarge number of data from many hundreds of weather stations and other data. All this data pooled together produces a significant result of (0.6 +/- 0.2) ?C per century.
But if you pick any individual station from the data they averaged over, then I would guess that the confidence interval for that station would be much larger and that a trend of zero would be well inside it. You could play this game for all the stations, and then say: "See, no global warming at station 1, no global warming at station 2, etc. etc." But in most of these cases the (0.6 +/- 0.2) ?C per century would be well inside the confidence interval as well.
