AGW methodology
I see you choose to not contest the data.
As for wings, right or left, I didn't mention either in this post. But I did include some facts and opinions, but no lies, to my knowledge, so I would ask you to clarify what you think is being made up.
You wrote: "You can't make this stuff up." Well, please see below.
If you are comfortable that the "...old CO2-can't-be-worse-than-H2O argument...had been put to rest here a long time ago," then I will leave you with that, but please let me remind you that many seemingly iron-clad scientific theories of the past have been shattered. It's not necessarily a question of a conspiracy, but simply better science. Consider that warm north pole of Saturn.
Oh, btw, you may have missed this
A surreal scientific blunder last week raised a huge question mark about the temperature records that underpin the worldwide alarm over global warming.
Well, I guess GISS didn't really make it up, they just got a little mixed up, and not for the first time.
Yet last week's latest episode is far from the first time Dr Hansen's methodology has been called in question. In 2007 he was forced by Mr Watts and Mr McIntyre to revise his published figures for US surface temperatures, to show that the hottest decade of the 20th century was not the 1990s, as he had claimed, but the 1930s.
S
(Not content to let sleeping dogs lie)