I do not know if I am reading too much into it, but it seems to me that there has been a subtle shift in the position of those who deny AGW. I was reading Dr Roy Spencer's blog a few days ago, he is the one that produces the graphs that Andrew Bolt used to show. His latest post seems to indicate a shift from that there is no global warming to a position of that the models might not be completely correct.

I must disagree with my good friend Dick Lindzen’s recent point he made during his keynote speech at the 4th ICCC meeting in Chicago, in which he asserted that the IPCC’s global warming hypothesis is not even plausible. I think it is plausible.

So now he seems to think that AGW is pausible! That made me sit up and think that it was a change in his position. I may be wrong.

The second is that Abbott now thinks that man is contributing to global warming.

I am confident, based on the science we have, that mankind does make a difference to climate, almost certainly the impact of humans on the planet extends to climate.

So AGW is not "crap" anymore eh?

I wonder if their changes have anything to do with the latest temperature readings - the same readings that they used to generate their graphs that proved that AGW was bunkum. I will get the latest graph up later (cannot do it from these Windoze laptops).

The inconvenient truth for the deniers is that the planet will continue to warm as a result of CO2E.