Let's just go through this thread. So far:
1. You've found something interesting but well-known to Climate Scientists, and presented it as if it's a revelation.
2. You read a link that contradicted your initial position, but seemed to think that it in fact agreed with you.
3. You effectively accused me of fabricating a quote from that same link, by suggesting it was only my opinion.
4. When it was pointed out that it was, in fact, a quote from the author of the paper you think supports you, you then dismissed it as only their opinion.
5. In spite of all these basic errors, you're refused to acknowledge them. Instead, you've decided to insult my scientific career prospects, presumably based on the back of a review post here, rather than by researching who I am, what I've done, what papers I've published, how they've been received by the community, etc etc.
You have some nerve, I'll give you that. I can assure you that nobody is more aware of my shortcomings as a scientist than I am, but if you think you understand how to do research better than I do, then think again. Thank you for your advice, but I suggest that you listen to it yourself first.