Nonsense. And it won’t matter how many times you make a claim, unless you can show why, and provide evidence for your claim, it’s just something you are saying. It’s not scientific, it’s not even a debate, it’s just repeating “It’s wrong”. I dealt with this in another topic already.
The “missing warming at the poles” was already answered before.
The myth that by using a short trend period the data shows somethng meaningless is easily debunked.
Winter trend from 1998-2013 shows clearly the large areas experiencing a cooling trend. Of course the warmer objects to a short term (15 years) trend when it shows cooling.
from 1995-2013 also shows the trend, but the warmer objects to a 18 year trend.
from 1992-2013 even still shows cooling winter trends, but a 21 period is too short.
from 1988-2013 a 25 year period.
There you see the cooling in Asia still showing up. But no longer the US. Except you can look at February (the coldest month of NH winters) and there it is again, a cooling trend for large parts of the US for February, from 1988.
Obviously from the severe cold this year, the trend is still happening for parts of the US, with colder winters, with more snow, becoming the norm.
If we see a 30 year trend for February, of colder temps and more snow, will it matter to the warmer? Not at all. If you showed a cooling trend for parts of the US that was 30 years long, it would be dismissed of course.
No, the only trend acceptable for examining winters, has to start in 1970, which is absurd to a scientific mind. Winters change rapidly in terms of both temperatures and snow, unlike the longer climate cycles. And the 70s was a period with the coldest winters ever recorded for most of the world.
There actually is another time period that shows the same sort of rapid decline for winter temperatures, along with the increased snowfall. (colder winters are always associated with increased snow, never the other way around)
But that colder winter trend was also associated with a cooling trend for summers as well. This current asymmetrical change is unusual in any ways.
That’s the really interesting part, to a scientist.