Having read the recent Don Easterbrook two part reply at WUWT (link part1 & link part2) I am a little confused about what it is that can and can't be supported at WUWT.
For those of you who have followed the rebuttal against Shakun et al. (Nature paper claiming that CO2 preceded late glacial warming) I have to ask myself how can Anthony Watts support this argument when he also says CO2 drives temperature!
John O'Sullivan and the Slayers (good name for a rock and roll band) support evidence that there is no such mechanism in existence in the Earths atmosphere to drive any warming and just like Don Easterbrook, support the science that CO2 follows a temperature increase. So it then becomes a bit of a mystery as to why Anthony Watts will not support John O'Sullivan and the Slayers in the same way.
Article continues below this advert:
There must be an explanation for this complete contradiction on where Anthony Watts stands in this respect.
Does Anthony Watts support "Man Made" climate change?
Is it OK for Anthony Watts to be all for CO2 following an increase in the Earths temperature AND also go on to support an increase in temperature from "Man Made" CO2, this I'm sure you would agree is a complete riddle!
Anthony you do a great job but not letting John O'Sullivan and the Slayers have their say is a complete contradiction to what your great site (WUWT) stands for, and that is freedom of speech!...GR