The first article is referring to an interview that is hardly a “debunk”. It’s just one persons opinion on how grave the issue is (e.g. should you stop having kids?).
> Atmospheric scientist John Christy developed a global temperature record of the lower atmosphere using highly accurate satellite soundings. NASA honored him for this achievement, and he was an author for a previous edition of the U.N. report. He told a House Science Committee hearing in March 2017 that the U.N. climate models have failed badly.
> Christy compared the average model projections since 1979 to the most reliable observations — those made by satellites and weather balloons over the vast tropics. The result? In the upper levels of the lower atmosphere, the models predicted seven times as much warming as has been observed. Overprediction also occurred at all other levels. Christy recently concluded that, on average, the projected heating by the models is three times what has been observed.
You characterize that as "classical climate change denial" and "just an artifact of a hand picked timeframe." Then you link to a Wikipedia article about "Climate change denial," as if he just needs to read it to understand what an ignorant denialist he is, and then he'll agree with you.
The second piece is classical climate change denial, e.g. the “pause/hiatus” in warming This animation shows well that it’s just an artifact of a hand picked timeframe https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leugnung_der_menschengemacht...
More info here https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change_denial