Note: I published this late on a Sunday. I'm going to beef this up with more examples from the junk-science-site (top item from each heading should be good) and republish.
If someone were to say "Of course weathermen are liars! Have you ever seen a cat or dog fall from the sky?" You would probably take this as an emotional statement, not a statement of fact. Your would assume the other person is commenting on how weathermen like to hype the weather to add drama. You would not assume the person meant this as a literal: that cats and dogs don't fall from the sky, therefore weathermen are liars. The conversation would then get surreal and bizarre if you were forwarded a link to a site debunking 'cats and dogs falling from the sky'. Well, that is where climate deniers are at. Follow below orange squiggle of doom....
See, here is the thing, check out this site: "Popular Technology dot net", or not. It is the "We're not a climate denier website, we just supply talking points to climate deniers" type of website. It is full of twisted logic about how straightforward it is. It also purports to have links to 1350+ peer-reviewed papers casting doubt on climate denial. Except they don't.
What the papers cast doubt on is the straw-man argument that CO2 levels single-handedly explain all past and present climate. Some of the papers are garbage, some of the papers are quite good, but their results are not in conflict with global warming, and their authors have written to the site stating that their conclusions are being misrepresented. One author even sued to have his paper removed from the listing. The site owner wears this all as a badge of honor though, obviously the authors of the papers fear the global CO2 conspiracy and that is why they won't state the true conclusions of their research.
And that is the real 'story' of the website. It is not that the papers debunk global warming, it is that the hypothesis of the entire site is wrong. It is the site that proves weathermen are liars because here is 1350+ papers describing thousands of storms, and not one instance of a cat or dog falling from the sky is documented. The site itself is in a way quite bizarre.
Having had this all thrown in my face, I've since realized that the climate deniers and right-wing have been mocking climate research for so long they don't even understand the theory they are mocking. There really are people who think climate researchers think C02 explains all climate variation. Once you poke through and realize this, it becomes alot easier to handle the deniers. Ask them what they are actually 'debunking', you might be surprised.
For the record, I haven't read all 1350+ papers. I just sampled several and was left with a "and this disproves global warming how?" feeling. That's when I realized it wasn't the papers, it was the site that was flawed.
Here is an example: The first paper it lists under the 'Antarctica' section is here. The paper is title "Active volcanism beneath the West Antarctic ice sheet and implications for ice-sheet stability" and discusses, surprise surprise, "aerogeophysical evidence for active volcanism ":
Here we present aerogeophysical evidence for active volcanism and associated elevated heat flow beneath the WAIS near the critical region where ice streaming begins. If this heat flow is indeed controlling ice-stream formation, then penetration of ocean waters inland of the thin hot crust of the active portion of the West Antarctic rift system could lead to the disappearance of ice streams, and possibly trigger a collapse of the inland ice reservoir.I'm not exactly sure how evidence of volcanic activity 'debunks' global warming, but apparently the site operator does. And, you could go on and on...