It's okay, it's data from abundantly peer reviewed literature and the logic seems okay too as oceans are extremely inert thermally, a few centuries is nothing, but...it's their interpretation not mine.
Right, but we do know the difference in dynamic responses between positive and negative feedback loops, with as shown lazy behavior of positive feedback loops, unwilling to change heading and move further away from the equilibrium (unstable) whereas negative feedback loops shows the opposite, with a trend to resist change and return to equilibrium (stable). This effect has been explored statistically in various ways by Olavi Kärner (one of the authors of the Independant Summary of Policy Makers). He invariably finds negative feedback which gives no support to the AGW hypothesis. His publications here
. One might wonder why Naomi Oreskes did not find these studies.
That's what I'm after the last couple of years and I bet my money on that. Unfortunately we have to sit out the AGW political ideology before we can progress again, as Richard Lindzen proposes here