Daniel,
One last try.
1. The study in 1979 is NOT relevant to any of these arguments except in difficulties in obtaining accurate data.
2. The study that I made the comment that the data was indisputable (an exageration but it was one study that actually used data that had an extremely good chance of being accurate) was completed in 2001. I already said this in my last post. This seems to indicate you do not actually read replies, which makes the whole process of discussion completely mute (except to others that might have an interest). While nothing in science is completely indisputable, there are many things that can be assumed to be valid. A study that uses the same measuring devices over a period of time, where the measuring devices themselves are shown to be accurate, is much closer to being indisputable than one that relies on recorded data where variables have been introduced over time that cannot be accounted for. THAT was the point being made. Looking at meteorological data over a period of many years from anywhere on this earth and the data is subject to dispute. Data from or above water has changed because the depth of collection and height of readings have changed. Data in small towns have changed because of the urban warming effect of nearby towns, or because the station has been moved, or because the measuring instruments have been replaced, or the time of measurements have been changed, or a tree nearby has grown or has been chopped down, or a building built or demolished. These variables all introduce uncertainties that you really cannot adjust for. However, the one study that I did quote, used measuring devices all made the same way, always in the same places, and with calibrated instruments. That makes the measurements reliable (although I concede the point that it does not make them or the study indisputable).
3. You keep making statements such as "the current extreme warming". This is not a field you seem to have taught, been published in, or seem to have particular expertise in. Yet you make statements such as the above as if you KNOW with absolute certainty of the truth of that opinion. I have suggested several times now that you refer to actual studies in support of any of your statements and you have not done so. That is the very definition of an unscientific argument.
Regards
Richard
