[cogitator]

"but the trend remaining toward an accelerated warming in lockstep with seemingly inexorable increases in CO2 requires a continuing shift in start-present graphs to remain obvious."

The thing is, global climate is variable. A simple fact lost on a lot of doubters is that the temperature doesn't have to rise in lockstep with increasing atmospheric CO2. It would be stranger if it did -- this is planet with a complex climate system.

If just one researcher could show an unequivocal setpoint where the global temperature ought to be, at least we would have a starting point.

I don't know about temperature. I'll show you where atmospheric CO2 ought to be, from a purely objective standpoint:

[Old Professer]

That explains nothing; why should CO2 be where this graph shows it? It’s too late to defend the claimed certainty based on the complexity, complexity drives uncertainty.

The Mauna Loa CO2 record is the only data now not subject to great scrutiny; it is the keystone of the entire edifice.

But the building will crumble where the bricks and mortar turn to powder.

For this tower reaching into the sky, the masons now need to mix up some new mortar.