Oh dear. Pointing out the reliability of your source is not a logical fallacy. It is called evaluating source material. In the future you should really use the CRAAP method to evaluate the quality of the information you are sharing. I can't believe I'm wasting my time on this but maybe it will help some other wayward soul.
Currency - the website
Global Temperature Trends Since 2500 B.C. shows that it was updated in March of 2018. Well that is a pretty good start. Until we look into his sources which include 2 books from the 1970s and some mythical science foundation papers I could not find.
Reliability - Most of the information on Cliff's website is opinion without stating sources. He makes claims without any evidence or sources listed. He has a complete section dedicated to climate change and how it is not real showing a definite bias towards this thinking.
Authority - So we know this was composed by Cliff Harris and Randy Mann. What we don't know is anything about their credentials. His biggest achievement seems to be "Climatologist Cliff Harris has been often rated as one of the top ten climatologists in the world for nearly 4 decades." Often rated by whom? His aunt? He does not show that he has any college degree, only stating that he has "over 300 credits from several different universities”. There is also no sponsor or publisher of the website besides Mr. Harris's own company. He has never been published in any sort of scientific paper let alone a peer reviewed journal but he did author "Weather and Bible Prophecy" with Randy Mann.
https://www.amazon.com/Weather-Bible.../dp/B00VGS3LN8. Apparently this includes topics such as:
- How God is using the weather to get our attention.
- When are the major climate and cultural cycles colliding?
- What are the futures prophecies based on the Bible?
- How did the weather influence major events in the Bible?
- How the weather could play a role in the "End Times."
- What will the "New Jerusalem" be like?
Accuracy - The information is clearly biased and is not supported by any concrete evidence. He did provide sources for his chart which were:
"Climate and the Affairs of Men" by Dr. Iben Browing.
"Climate...The Key to Understanding Business Cycles...The Raymond H. Wheeler Papers. By Michael Zahorchak
Weather Science Foundation Papers in Crystal Lake, Illinois.
Two of those sources are books and I could not find any evidence of Weather Science Foundation Papers in Crystal Lake, Illinois. His "evidence" is based on books, not scientific research. The first author
"Iben Browning (January 9, 1918 – July 18, 1991) was an American business consultant, author, and "self-proclaimed climatologist."[1]: p. 2 He is most notable for having made various failed predictions of disasters involving climate, volcanoes, earthquakes, and government collapse.[2]: p. 11"
[1]Farley, John E. Earthquake Fears, Predictions, and Preparations in Mid-America. Southern Illinois University Press.
[2]Spence, William; Herrmann, Robert B.; Johnston, Arch C. & Reagor, Glen (1993), "Responses to Iben Browning's Prediction of a 1990 New Madrid, Missouri, Earthquake" (PDF), U.S. Geological Survey, Circular 1083.
The second author wrote books on business and investing. I couldn't find anything more about this author. Needless to say not great sources.
The information was not peer reviewed, He incorrectly calls the IPCC the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Control. The chart does not even have a scale on the Y-axis and the few temperatures listed are in Fahrenheit not the scientific standard of Celsius.
Purpose - The website is set up to try and sell not only advertising (advertisers click here) but also "Daily commodity and long range weather service for only $11.95/month!" Additionally you can contact them if you are an attorney and have them present "forensic meteorology" by using his 100 scrapbooks. All that goes to show his information is not for scientific purposes but rather to make money.
All in all if you just took two minutes to look into the quality of the information you are trying to spread you would save us all a lot of time and even prevent the spread of horrible misinformation. Unfortunately I know that is not what your intentions are. I know this will fall on deaf ears with you but I hope that if anyone else on this forum was going to believe the drivel you have presented this will make them think twice and maybe just maybe they will look into the glut of real scientific papers themselves. Or you know, they could just take the easy way out and believe the 97% of scientist and over 200 international scientific organizations that believe that humans are causing a severe impact on our climate.