You are probably right Rob, people continuing to believe the earth is 6000 years old is a clear example of that. And it's much, much easier to see for yourself that the earth is very old, than it is to see that the climate has changed globally.
To answer Mr Calders questions;
Antarctic temperature data
If east antarctica is cooling at all, that does not imply that carbon dioxide is not driving global warming as he suggest. Changes in ocean currents and prevailing winds are certain to result from GW and that will cool some regions as well as warming others. It should be pretty obvious to everyone that you can't use one or two isolated local or regional changes to prove or disprove GW.
http://www.gfdl.noaa.gov/reference/b...06/jrl0601.pdf
The lower troposphere and troposphere measurements look to have increased significantly since 1999 to me. The stratosphere may be stable or cooling, but that's explained by the GW theory and actually supports it.
In answering questions about genuine local or regional cooling events, progress will be made towards greater understanding of the earth's climate. Skepticism is a vital element in making progress in scientific understanding. But if you are going to ask useful challenging questions, they need to be based around valid information and not guesswork or supposition. Repeating the same questions that have already been answered many times, or continually introducing discredited falsehoods is not useful, it just wastes time and shows the ignorance and prejudice of the "skeptic".
If the anti-GW brigade asked sensible and challenging questions they'd be very useful to the debate, but almost invariably they don't.