An example of an own goal from the sceptic side was this article by Tim Ball in which he talked about «the Big Lie», which angered Professor Richard Betts, one of the
few professional climate scientists who will talk to us, who responded with this.
Although apparently highly technical, the piece has been strongly criticised
by professional climate scientists, including Gavin Schmidt, of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, New York.
However, applying some common - sense criteria can give a layperson a clear indication of the lack of credibility: the source is a «climate skeptics» website, there is no research institution and
no professional climate scientists behind these claims, and there is no peer - reviewed publication with the cooling forecast, rather it is directed exclusively at a lay audience.
I am an amateur rather than
a professional climate scientist.
Clearly Gavin knows a lot about temperature measurements, as well as a lot about the physics which causes temperature to change (he is, after all,
a professional climate scientist).
I don't believe for one second that
a professional climate scientist and professor could possibly be unaware of the uncertainties!
I believe that your model with a mostly 25 - year response time may win a lot of admirers in the sceptic blogosphere, but you would have a hard time gaining acceptance from most of
the professional climate scientists for the reasons detailed by Isaac Held as I paraphrased above to the best of my understanding.
The sloppiness and carelessness at some of the sites recently photographed suggests poor quality control oversight by
professional climate scientists.