I still suggest that shooting the message should happen, before shooting the messenger. Only then you could ask if he was mistaking or lying. My list proved that at least there was some substantiation to tying climate to solar solar cycles. Therefore the credentials of the messenger are irrelevant. Actually could it be that the global warming tyranny has generated "nutters"?
I guess it all boils down to believing the logic. The problem here is that the studies, which are refuting strong effects of greenhouse gasses on global temperature, are published with an ever increasing rate. For instance:
http://www.aai.ee/~olavi/EE2007-ok.pdf
which is not on this listing:
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.c...y.SenateReport
Now of course you can routinely spout your vitriol on the messenger and dismiss the 400, but he is only showing what is publisehed peer reviewed. And BTW, for the warmers, how much more years of not warming more than previous, are required to realize that there might be some problems with the IPCC stance?