amusing to throw the 1860-1879 warming into the mix?" Is that the comment of someone who is genuinely interested in climate science or someone whose only iterest is in the spreading of disinformation? manacker Tempterrain Hi Peter, Welcome back from hibernation! Robin may indeed have had a scientific interest in the 1858-1879 warming period. It is part of a series of warming/cooling cycles our planet has seen since the modern temperature record started. You and I have discussed these and their apparent 60-year cyclical nature, which points to some cyclical climate driving force that has not yet been fully understood by climate scientists today (and largely ignored by IPCC in its myopic fixation on anthropogenic GHGs, primarily CO2). You wrote "Unfortunately, it is a waste of time debating with the likes of Max and Robin". I am really sorry that you feel that way, Peter. I always considered our exchanges interesting and informative. Under the premise that it "a waste of time" debating with someone whose views you are unable to change, both you and I (as well as Robin) may have been "wasting our time". I do not view this as the goal of debating (changing the other party's opinion), but rather hearing another opinion, taking issue with those portions of the opinion with which one does not agree, seeing if there is any common ground or any points where one could agree, etc.). When discussing religion, this becomes more difficult as positions often become more intransigent and rigid.