>Uh, the global warming proponents are apparently claiming a 0.05
>degree "per decade" rise as grounds for massive restrictions on
>personal freedom. They do have data from further back in time, but
>there are good reasons to consider the data unreliable. Their
>predictions certainly don't match the measurements over a lousy
>two decades.
>Or is this what you mean? That neither side has a good case?
That wasn't specifically my point, but it's reasonable interpretation.
I haven't personally seen the data either way, so I can't comment in
detail, but it's my belief that the fluctuation of annual average
temperature is on the order of a couple degrees. (It would be nice
to see the data you refered to. Is it available online?) On that
basis, a "per-decade" change of 0.05, when the per-year change is
more than an order of magnitude larger, is not very convincing either
way.