Re. So amidst that stated uncertainty and large variability, and only a stated appearance of a long term trend over the next century, you use a single data point just 5 years later to incorrectly claim that is evidence the scientists were wrong?"
A single data point? You asked about the Great Lakes. That is one example. I could probably compile 10 similar examples. 7 years ago the climate alarmists said the great lakes were about to dry to a trickle, now they say it is disastrously flooding. I'm just showing you how they changed. From a trickle to a flood and they're still right.
You're just proving what people keep telling you alarmists. You will stand by something until it is wrong, and then claim it doesn't count or it's a misread, or the science is settled. It's like watching a bull in a china shop.
Again, still no answers to any of my questions and observations.
