FrankVW,

There was an interesting paper out recently that used Watt’s information and found that the badly sited weather station had a cooling bias, and so couldn’t be responsible for a warming bias:

http://www.skepticalscience.com/On-the-reliability-of-the-US-Surface-Temperature-Record.html

The North Pole blog post shows how easily scientific reports get misreported, as it is titled:

“Greenland glaciers – melt due to sea current change, not air temperature”

BUT, nowhere in the quoted news release does it state this, in fact – quite the opposite:

While melting due to warming air temperatures is a known event, scientists are just beginning to learn more about the ocean’s impact — in particular, the influence of currents — on the ice sheet.

As to the Daily Mail article, it seems to be just a rehash of the stories posted by ATFS_Crash at the start of the thread, and just as eroneous. I mean, look at the claim:

“Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no global warming since 1995”

That is just wrong – because admitting that the trend is not quite statistically significant is not the same as saying there is no warming. Absence of rock-solid stats for one thing does not mean another option is certain.

As an aside, statistical significance requires 95% confidence that the trend is caused by what you’re attributing it to. In Jones’ case he says it’s just below the significance level – so he’s only around 90% sure that the warming is man-made from 1995. That’s pretty good in my book.