Roger wrote:

No, what you have been claiming all along is that CO2/global warming is
a myth and anything that doesn't support that claim is badly researched
rubbish or worse.

Forgive me if I don't answer directly the rest of the points you made,
partly because you've demonstrated that you can't read a graph or use
it's data, thus bringing into doubt the rest of your comments. For
that graph is essentially a key piece of data.

I was looking at a more easily available graph which is much less
distinct. The page 25 graph certainly does not show that the period 1960
- 1998 was unusually cool. 1950 - 1960 might not be marginally cooler as
I originally thought but the decline over the period 1950 - 1980 is
minimal compared to the steep increases 1920 - 1945 and 1974 - 2004. And
you will note (and disregard) that the base line of this graph is the
temperature at the end of the 19th century.

I'm not responsible for the way the graph was presented, but
nevertheless in order to place the Met Office's own estimate of the
increase for 2008 on the Met Office's own graph it isn't actually
necessary to involve the baseline. I'm surprised you seem unfamiliar
with such straightforward data-handling.

I did not choose the 1960 - 1990 as a baseline, the Global Warmers
did. By choosing a different baseline, the planet can be shown to be
cooling, and possibly cooling for some years now. If you don't grasp
this simple concept, the your search for 'the truth' will founder on
this very simple and very clear concept.

And, if you plot the Met Office's own figure of 0.37 degC on the Met
Office's own graph, it would show you that the expected temperature
difference for this year is below the maximum value shown; that is,
the planet might be cooling even by the Met Office's own data; and is
certainly about the value for the late 1990s, implying a peak in value
between 2000 and now. An inconvenient truth, perhaps.

There is too much year on year variability to make any prediction for
the future on the basis of just one year and dubious to make one even on
several.

Scientists are used to handling data; it's their bread-and-butter.
Banks, supermarkets, health services, traffic handlers and
half-a-hundred other industries are used to handling variable data.
Sophisticated tools exist to handle data. To an analyst, there can be
no such thing as 'too much variability'; your statement is a nonsense
and shows your simplistic approach and technical ignorance.