You poor thing. Now I feel bad. Maybe I should take it easier on you. Not what the temperature record says. That's why you have to rave about vinyards. Like I said, that reveals you to be a pseudoscience cultist. You have to reject the solid hard data in favor of fuzzy nebulous data, because the hard data contradicts you. Except your peer-reviewed references don't back you up. You just say they do. In contrast, my references back up my claim. For example, https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/12828157.pdf Look at page 44. The MWP is barely a blip. Modern temps are higher. Your sources are a bunch of conspiracy blogs, not peer reviewed science. No wonder you get everything so wrong. Got it. You don't understand the very simple concept of noise around a trend. You really shouldn't be bothering the grownups. Your conspiracy blog just lied about what those papers said. I've already addressed that cherrypicking fallacy. Schneider is a wild outlier. So tell us why that paper, the outlier, should be trusted over all others. Discuss the data and statistics in detail. That is, make sure you say something more than "BECAUSE IT AGREES WITH ME!". If you can't, you're just a cult cheerleader. And there it ends, as you're reduced again to blubbering about the world plotting a conspiracy against you after you get ripped apart. I'll see you soon, when we can do this all again. That is, you'll eventually be reduced to screaming that all the data is faked.