Flats - the recent temperatures there are wrong and you know it....

Flats - the recent temperatures there are wrong and you know it. The data presented is based on proxies, which is what the infamous tree rings were. The instrument record shows that the temperature is going up not down in the last few decades. Also, I don't believe the theory of AGW is dependent on the tree ring proxies or the hockey stick, so yet again another beat up.

I see that list of 450 so called peer reviewed papers that apparently 'disprove AGW' is actually "a list of papers that have skeptical views" and is from wattsupwiththat.com, a blog site that has no credibility whatsoever. I'm tipping that you can read just about any pro-AGW peer reviewed paper and find data that increases our understanding of AGW which can then be painted as having an element of scepticism. Yet more cherry picking of data and another total beat up. This really is getting monotonous.

As for the photos in China - they really are appalling photographs. You are all environmentalists all of a sudden, but you are not prepared to support an ETS or a deal at Copenhagen which if implemented correctly in a concerted global effort will help reduce such emissions from the smoke stacks in the very photos you have published. Disgraceful hypocrisy yet again from the HC sceptics.