You know, I think climatologists might know almost as much about paleoclimatology as you do, what with being climatologists. They are, surely, well aware that it has been hotter in former geological periods than it is now. Perhaps, dare I suggest it, they understand this fact and its causes even better than you do.
As arguments from authority go, then, your reference to your credentials is somewhat lacking: firstly, because there are higher authorities, who are the very people whose opinion you wish to dispute; and secondly, because you don't need to be a petroleum exploration geologist to know what you do about paleoclimates.
I knew that.
As for your reasoning ...
"As a demographer, I can assert that for most of human history the average life expectancy was no more than thirty --- if that. And yet the prosecution wishes you to believe that the death of John Smith was "unnatural", even though he lived to the ripe old age of forty-five. Given the statistics I have cited, we can therefore disregard the fact that he was living in the twenty-first century, the fact that witnesses saw Fred Bloggs empty a revolver into his chest, and the so-called "medical evidence" suggesting that this was the cause of death. The Anthropogenic Death Hypothesis is a crock!"
P.S: do mathematicians count as scientists for the purposes of keeping score?
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
™ Version 4.2
(1)