Re: £875 per household per year!
'If I could just observe, when satellite measurements support the received official wisdom of climate change, they are breathlessly quoted as proof of the matter. Funnily enough, if they don't support that position, then they can be explained away.'
I think the issue is that where research is republished especially for a popular audience, satellite = high tech = better has been assumed. What isn't explained is how satellites infer temperatures and that there are known issues with their records - some of which have only been discovered since the discrepancies in the satellite record have become obvious. What we should be saying is that the satellite record, although imprecise, gives us a truly global coverage which hasn't been the case so far.
'Climate change is happening, I accept that. But the correlation against CO2 is probably similar to the correlation with toothpaste consumption. Unlike the majority of the population and most climate change enthusiasts, I have actually studied climate science at degree level. And I'm unconvinced by the simplistic CO2=climate change.'
At a very simple level CO2 is causative on temperature change - John Tyndall and Svante Arrhenius proved that in the 19th Century. The exact percentage of temperature change due to CO2 as opposed to other factors is the current question. But the weight of evidence is such that people proposing other methods are struggling to find suitable mechanisms for warming the planet whilst finding some way in which increased CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere don't do what they do in the lab. (And yes, climate change was a good part of my post-grad degree, so I've laboured through more forcing papers than is good for anyone's soul).
'You'd better mark me down as some racist Brexiteer climate change denying Daily Fail reading, 4x4 driving, reactionary idiot.'
Why on Earth would I want to do that? Twitter is there if I want to be horrible online.
Have an upvote for having a decent argument.