In the Canberra Times of 9 January 2012, this letter appeared:

You have to love all those climate-change alarmists.

Only an eye-blink ago they were proclaiming a scorched-earth apocalypse for this wide brown land.

As La Nina wove her enigmatic magic in 2011, with our third-wettest year in memory, the alarmists remain in denial about the overwhelming influence of atmospheric and solar influences that mock, as always, the puny effect of mankind’s carbon dioxide emissions.

The hot air emissions of the climate-change alarmists do more to raise the global temperature than the burning of that old bogeyman, carbon.

As 2012 dawns, the solar gods are truly laughing.

John Bell, Lyneham

I replied with this:

If John Bell (Letters, 9 January) really believes that one La Niña
year represents some kind of disproof of mainstream climate science, I
can only conclude that he’s been reading too many climate denial
blogs. A single wet, cool, hot or dry year is just a blip on the
graph; what matters is the long term trend. Nowhere will you find
mainstream climate science predicting that every single year will be
hotter, or drier, or anything at all; it’s all about the subtle
changes underlying the usual year-to-year roller coaster of El Niño,
La Niña, volcanoes, etc. Globally, the ten warmest years on record
have all occurred since 1998.

Since 1970 the world’s average surface temperature has steadily gone
up at a rate of 0.17 degrees per decade, which is entirely in line
with the projections of climate science. During that time, the sun’s
impact on climate, and other non-greenhouse factors, have actually had
a slightly cooling effect. There is currently no plausible cause for
this warming other than the effect of increased greenhouse gases, and
there is a truly vast body of evidence supporting that conclusion.

Matt Andrews

Also interesting is that 2011 was the hottest La Niña year on record, and that La Niña years show a distinct warming trend.