Sally Vix wrote:
Timothy Foyle wrote:
I notice that Sally Vix responded to other challenges to this particular post of his. But not this one. Gee, I wonder why.
Sally? Are you there, Sally?
I am here but entertaining friends. Which post should I respond to? sorry for the delay.
We're still waiting on you, Sally.
Still entertaining friends?
Citizen Runner wrote:
Sally Vix wrote:
I was suggesting that it is silly to say "warmest years on record" when "on record" only means about 140 years out of 4.6 BILLION years. It is just silly because you are implying these "warmest years on record" are the warmest ever when that is not the truth.
Just so we have a common point of reference, on which temperature reconstructions do you base this statement?
To be clear, I don't disagree with the statement, so much as I find it curious that someone simultaneously doubts recent direct temperature measurements and has apparent confidence in proxy reconstructions and all that implies.
This is an interesting question. I wonder what Sally V will say.
This Manly Man wrote:
Citizen Runner wrote:
Just so we have a common point of reference, on which temperature reconstructions do you base this statement?
To be clear, I don't disagree with the statement, so much as I find it curious that someone simultaneously doubts recent direct temperature measurements and has apparent confidence in proxy reconstructions and all that implies.
This is an interesting question. I wonder what Sally V will say.
LOL
Perhaps this should be a lesson to the deniers (as opposed to the trolls). When someone asks an obvious question that exposes the underlying lack of logic in the denier position, the denier hides away in his/her safe place.
Nice job, Sally! You've proven the other side's point.
///
(or are you still entertaining friends? snicker, snicker)