This post, untrue. Previous post, irrelevant. I guesss you forgot to "hide the decline" from other sources!!! News to the skeptics/deniers, natural cycles need to be taken into account when presenting your arguments, TOO!!!!
I only used the data presented by Old Rocks in the first post on the thread.
Are you disputing his sources?
No, I'm disputing your conclusions.
1 1998 0.52 2010 0.52 2010 0.56
2 2010 0.5 2005 0.52 2005 0.55
3 2005 0.47 1998 0.5 2007 0.51
4 2003 0.46 2003 0.49 2009 0.5
5 2002 0.46 2002 0.48 2002 0.49
6 2009 0.44 2006 0.46 1998 0.49
7 2004 0.43 2009 0.46 2006 0.48
8 2006 0.43 2007 0.45 2003 0.48
9 2007 0.4 2004 0.45 2011 0.45
10 2001 0.4 2001 0.42 2004 0.41
11 2011 0.36 2011 0.41 2001 0.4
I'm not sure what the dispute might be. Of the first 11 years listed in the table that old rocks posted in the thread opener, 2011 is the coolest. The only post 2000 year cooler than 2011 is 2008.
Using the above data, how many years do you conclude might be cooler than 2011?