I'm just looking for you to back up your stated opinions with some evidence, science, or anything substantive.
As far as i can see there is evidence for a "medieval climate anomaly" as it seems to be getting called now. But there is no evidence that I am aware of that the MCA was synchronously or fully global, or in any way argues against the seriousness and different causes of AGW now. The scientists that have gathered more evidence about the MCA aren't running around arguing that the MCA negates current greenhouse gas warming and predictions. I've provided some info to support that view and information that contradicts your other statements. You've provided nothing in the way of evidence for your view, nor to argue my rebuttal of your views.
I'm happy to be enlightened by evidence otherwise, but you are not providing that.
I'm not about to apologise for calling you out for making unsubstantiated comments (and not, today, for the first time). And I am not going to apologise for saying your approach suggests your views are based on ignorance and blinkered thinking. It's up to you to show otherwise.
So far your best is "Absolute rubbish!" and a resort to some ad hom. Up to you to show if you can do better.
