Warmist Kevin Anderson: Ten years of data is not much of a climate change signal; climate change is "a complicated, complex and system-level issue, and consequently uncertainties abound"; skeptics should be thanked because their efforts have resulted in "a much more open and resilient science community"

Stop tailoring global warming scenarios to make them “politically palatable” says leading climate scientist

You can not say that any one year, or two years, or even ten years, is much of a signal that climate change is occurring or is not occurring. You need to look at longer time frames, and the longer-term trends have not changed.
...
The public and media appear often to struggle with the concept of science as an evolving process. Consensus views emerge and evolve. This doesn’t mean understanding is flipping from one thing to another, though this is often how it is reported and interpreted. This is a real problem for the science underpinning climate change: it is attempting to shed light on a complicated, complex and system-level issue, and consequently uncertainties abound. By its very nature, understanding climate change is open to being undermined by Machiavellian “sceptics”. It is much easier to be cynically critical of climate science than it is to do good science.
...for science, the repercussions of [skeptics'] efforts have been to deliver a much more open and resilient science community and demonstrate the robustness of the science underpinning concerns about climate change. So, in a strange way, they are to be thanked.