Nice try, Salon.
It’s always enjoyable watching journalism majors deal with the subjects that caused them to sink to the level which forced them to pursue journalism in college.
My short course on your short course:
1. The physics of GW doesn’t work. Not now. Not ever.
2. The models don’t work. Didn’t then. Don’t now.
3. You might try to look up the meaning of “correlation”.
4. You might try to get someone with a little knowledge of math to try and get your little minds to get a grasp on the meaning of “principal component analysis” and why your so-called “climate scientists” evidently skipped - or failed - that class.
5. You might try to explain why periods in which the average temp was much higher than it is now were much better periods for humanity. (Simple summary for libs - warm is better than cold. Much better.)
6. Oh yeah, where’s your reporting on the fact that the so-called “heating” has stopped?
In summary, please, deal only with things you can understand...such as...er...uh...
The author is from Scientific American and this is published (reprinted?) in Salon.