Here is another warning about using proxies from your article slarti. and I again agree. (by the way I may not respond for a while... I am taking some time off. Happy thanksgiving to all who celebrate it.) As I have said many times in the past... its complete bullshit to take the proxy records... then graph temperature records onto them and act like we all of a sudden have warming. What Mann did with his hockey stick and aga nutter still do.. it act like todays instrument data shows us that we are warmer than we were before there were thermometers. That is fraud. Anyone who does that should have their degrees and credentials yanked. (unless they post disclaimers at the beginning of their work or on each graph or explain why their work overcomes this universal problem) Just about every serious author states proxies are uncertain. They warn about the uncertainty. The lack of resolution. They are far more useful to compare internally than for pegging and exact temperature. Miloš Rydval, University of St. Andrews In the Rydval et al 2017 article, we clearly and repeatedly emphasize that there is a considerable amount of uncertainty associated with our temperature reconstruction and this generally increases further back in time and is related to, among others, data availability. This point is discussed in considerable detail in the paper and is a matter that was entirely ignored by the source cited in the Breitbart article. Thus, the cited statement: “[the reconstruction] suggests that the recent summer-time warming in Scotland is likely not unique when compared to multi-decadal warm periods observed in the 1300s, 1500s, and 1730s …” was taken out of context and misrepresented. The cited source conveniently omitted the second part of the sentence which highlights uncertainty in the earlier parts of the reconstruction and includes a cautionary statement about the interpretation of those periods. Also, it should be noted that our study provides information about conditions in and around Scotland, and is therefore not a representation of the average global trends of temperature change over time, but instead represents local scale variability. Importantly, there is nothing in our paper that in any way contradicts recent anthropogenic climate change and its causes.