This comment is being posted around the blogosphere, including on Bishop Hill's site Skeptics and conspiracy buffs need to understand that even without any CRU data nor the publications of it scientists, there are MULTIPLE lines of evidence for AGW: 1) UAH, RSS, and GISS show warming 2) Rapidly warming Arctic 3) Rapidly decreasing sea ice extent 4) Rapidly thinning sea ice 5) Rising ocean heat content 6) Cooling stratosphere 7) Net increase in downwelling LW 8 ) Net decreasing TOA LW emission 9) Increased species migrations/extinctions 10) Increased severe weather occurrences 11) Glacier mass loss and retreats increasing 12) Rising sea levels 13) Most importantly: rapidly rising human emissions of GHGs that have not been seen in millions of years. None of these things read emails and have decided to play along in a massive international conspiracy. Scott A. Mandia, Professor - Meteorology http://www2.sunysuffolk.edu/mandias/global_warming I admit I had to do a bit of research on the LW downwelling (radiation in the Long Wave spectrum that is bouncing about the atmosphere) reasons and I think I have found the relevant figures http://www.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/t4/tlsglhmam_5.1 The global figures graphed out: Maybe I got the wrong figures but that doesn't convince me that man is warming the atmosphere. And none of the other arguments work either. Over the last few centuries it has been warming, the sea has been gently rising, the ice has retreated but that doesn't prove anything about man's involvement. The arctic temperature argument is dealt with at Watts Up as is the sea ice alarms. Severe weather? Is that Hurricanes, don't make me laugh and Ocean heat - purleeaze! And the thirteenth and most important argument that rising levels of man made GHG prove AGW can be filed under non sequitur. Are these really the best arguments that we can be presented with?