Reply to Dr. Svalgaard and Dr. Pratt

with  regard to my comments on the


To all  who still may be around in a way of reply (tried to post already twice, but it failed for some reason unless my 'contributions' are destined for the waste bin.


I don't care much who is, or are Dunning-Kruger, just having good fun seeing the two  Stanford (USA second best University) experts squirming around looking for a solution, where they well know there is none.

Dr. Svalgaard has my data (I emailed to him the Excel file), he knows is it is good, so his only way out ' your data is made up' .


         Of course if you have two sets of scalar or vector values, and then you perform simple arithmetic calculation, the result is MADE UP of two sets of data into a new one, in this case, surprising good approximation of the natural temperature variability in the North Hemisphere.


The above is published ( you can see date stamp) , whole thing is explained in very fine detail and handful of scientists are informed, among them Dr. Svalgaard, with the additional advantage of him having copy of the actual Excel file.


Reading through some of the further comments including some from Dr. Pratt, they appear to be lot of a plain nonsense, when the ideas fail, revert to psychology is the exit out of embarrassing situation.


As far as Belo-Russia is concerned, they are fine example to the some of the CO2 theorists here, how to force free thinking people to submit to obviously failed theory.

Both ( Belo-Russia and the AGW) are still clinging to the something that is plainly failed or failing. Perhaps these two learned gentlemen would propose that no free thinking is allowed, unless it conforms to their psychological prescription.

Let me remind you  that is not what universities are about, and I hope you are here as free agents, rather than espousing latest thinking of that great institution.


How about going back to what is presented to you, and standing up to the challenge:

Explain 350 years of no warming in the CET summer temperatures:

 or go back to meaningless waffle.


See you soon.