My original comment was to someone else's comment regarding the inevitability and anthropogenic component of global warming not a comment directed at your diary. You then came in, which is reasonable in your diary, but it seems like my response to you was directly appropriate to what you said to me.

As to qualifications, I am judging based on what you say in this diary. You provide little indication of your qualifications. I provided precicely what I was basing my comments on and the fact that a very recent issue of Science highlights an earlier contradiction (or at least considerable modification) to your comment does indicate that you are behind on things.

Now, once again, you were the one who started the "real" challenge. So, why not start again, state your main point and what specifically you are basing it on and we can go from there. But questioning the broad consensus or questioning the "real" apsect of scientists like Jim Hansen won't convince me of anything.