If I'm missing a point, it's because you are now spewing them in about eighteen different directions. This whole thing is very simple.

What I did was simply correct your mistake, using your link. Actually the scientific link in the popular article. I assume that's okay right? You said this...

This is the (incorrect) hypothesis called global cooling, the concept the globe's actually cooling (I assume you believe the Earth is a globe at the very least, right?). Essentially, people misusing the geological time scale and large-period climatic oscillations to justify beliefs for a short-term climatic oscilation.

THEN I POINTED OUT
And you were wrong. The article and the article it linked to didn't say that.

AND YOU SAID.
I think I now get your point here.

It doesn't matter if you got the point. You were wrong. You said "people misuse the geological time scale and large-0period climatic oscillations to justify beliefs for a short-term climatic oscillation."

Your words, your problem. If I'm wrong, please just point to the paragraph where they "misuse the geological time scale."

No more goal shifting please. Why not do this. Restate the primary thesis (One concept, not fourteen), and back that with one or two decent links?