> I would like to blog about this someday… but I feel I should first blog about “has global warming stopped?” which is a more basic argument that skeptics often make.

It's probably only a wild statement, but lately I was reading some financial pages of a newspaper and came across an analysis (well, it used sentences like "the gold market is trying to tell us something" so maybe analysis is an overstatement, though there seemed to be some content in the article too) of the timeseries of some product (well, gold), remarking that the price had dropped below some X-day-average for the first time in several years, and this reminded me somehow of skeptical arguments about temperature timeseries.

Perhaps some skeptics look upon a timeseries of temperature in the way they look upon the timeseries of a stock product? Which could be the source of some confusion (remember also that recent paper on the blog from some economists claiming that there is no correlation between temperature and carbon emissions). I'm in no way knowledgeable about trading, but it seems to me that the mechanisms behind the timeseries are very very different -- even though one could perhaps say that in both cases the mechanisms are antropogenic ;-) So what could perhaps be meaninfully ascribed as "the rising has stopped" in a market timeseries would not be a meaningful statement if the timeseries were about temperature.

PS I received an email from Azimuth saying that David (A) Tanzer has been added as administrator