It's interesting that the summer graph I pulled from the very same datasource that provided the winter graph used in the quoted statement is "anecdotal," but theirs is "data." You want to explain that one to me?

The first graph I posted was statewide and annual, and made my point, too.

The "entire scientific community" has apparently been defined in the discussion as "any scientists who support the AGW theory." There are quite a few scientists who don't like the direction the debate has taken, including some who worked for the IPCC project. But then, you have seen for yourself what happens to reputable scientists who step off the current Path of Truth. If you call this pressure "imaginary and undocumented," you haven't been paying attention.

Scientists live and die by politics in an age when politicians fund a great deal of science. If science can be tilted by corporate funding, it can sure as hell be tilted by the far greater government funding.

The real world has not been cooperating with the models. A lot of people are beginning to notice this.

If we're talking "bad companions," look where the debate is taking place, and what's actually being discussed. This stopped being about climate science a long time ago. It's about power and loot. To date, no solutions have been proposed by the leaders of the debate that do not involve massive increases in state power and large-scale wealth redistribution. This is not an accident.