Replies

It may well be BS, but the correct way to address it is to look at what data Professor Jonathan Martin used and how he analyzed it. A pre-publication version of the article can be found here: http://www.inc.com/jeff-haden/3-interview-questions-that-reveal-everything.html
Most of the analysis focuses on radiosonde or weather balloon data. If so, then one problem that he raises is that the weather balloon data does not support the rapid global warming thesis and is aligned with the satellite data.
His approach also suggests the use of some rather tricky time series statistics which requires considerable statistical sophistication. His repeated focus on “correlation” without any mention of autocorrelation adjustments and the absence of time series analysis in his references suggests that statements of the significance of any findings needs to interpreted with caution.
This is especially so since his Figure 2 suggests a potential cyclical effect rather than a linear effect.
Unfortunately either the data or Martin’s analysis does not go back to the last extended warming during the 30s.
Finally, while he casually mentions what is happening in the Antarctic, there is no presentation of this data and since there is a modest link between the -5C areal extent and sea ice extent this IMHO should have been addressed more extensively.
In short, many of the ad hominem comments here are unhelpful and it is smarter to look carefully at what is being said or not said.