lols amusing. You should think before you comment. And you...

lols amusing. You should think before you comment. And you should get your accusations correct. I called some of your particular comments idiotic and I was clear on which ones. I did not call you idiotic.

And when I did so I had already looked at most of the first paper, and the realclimate commentary on it, which was transparent on the adjustment made and the references to the other papers that explained that further. But it took me a while to find full copies of the referenced papers.

But I had seen enough to demonstrate that the paper was transparent on what it had done. Indeed it was that transparency that allowed the misjudged criticism. Calling it a fraud was therefore completely out of line.

-------

You clearly haven't read or fathomed my earlier comments pointing out that I posted a heat content chart that was called a heat content chart. Nothing out of line with that. There was no purporting a heat content chart to be a temp chart.
You have a problem with heat content charts being used to show warming. That is your own particular little problem, but I most certainly did not purport a heat content chart to be a temperature one. So pull your head in.

YOU, are the person calling decent papers frauds and accusing me of something I have not done.
But, in all my time investigating denial claims, that is par for the course, so water of a ducks back.