Oops, browser malfunction, sorry about the repost...
"I agree that 1998 was hot but the relatively constant warming claim is debateable. The head of the IPCC concedes that data from the last 6 years is baffling vis a vis the GW theory - I think you could have the temerity to do the same."
I don't think it really is debatable, see this guy's analysis of US temperatures for details: http://tamino.wordpress.com/2007/08/31/garbage-is-forever/
Sure the temperatures flattens out a bit, but comments like the one in the Australian are unhelpful at best, and intentionally misleading at worst. Looking at global temperatures it is certainly not debatable (see NASA graphs I posted previously).
I haven't seen the head of the IPCC revert from his position, will have to DMOR as you say.
I take your point about the sources, which is why I only mentioned them offhand and rebutted what they said.
"My point is that the science is not "settled" anyone that suggests otherwise is lying.
I support honest inquiry - what we are witnessing here is the opposite - one side of a debate insisting that debate is over and trying to shut the other side down"
I think that for the vast majority of scientist the issue is settled although certainly there are many more details to be ironed out. I'm not trying to shut anyone down, just trying to provide a voice of reason amongst all the noise.
A good site run by scientists that addresses many issues related to GW: www.realclimate.org
