Beneath contempt, Nigel. In future, try to follow the thread. You are so intent on picking holes in what I say that you appear not to notice anything else. Context, for example. Incidentally, your post yesterday blatantly misrepresented the graph in your link. You seem to want untrue things to be true just to get them to fit your agenda. That was a classic example. Once again you made me the target of that even though what I said was perfectly correct and so you made a complete fool of yourself. And I don't often change the meanings of my remarks claiming that they were whimsy. I've done it once and I was doling out to you the sarcasm you deserved on that occasion. Take a step back, Nigel. The target of your remarks here should be the issues we're discussing, not things picked out of posts with a magnifying glass in order to further your career in pedantry.

What did I say about the graph that was misleading?

Once again your post is so rambling as to be almost indecipherable.