I'm amazed that he even considers himself a skeptic. Everything in here has already been said by other scientists already, eg. his analysis apparently consists essentially of fitting temperature to CO2 levels:
"Our result is based simply on the close agreement
between the shape of the observed temperature rise
and the known greenhouse gas increase. "
About the only reason that this is newsworthy is that he's a notable climate skeptic, and he's funding comes from Koch, a coal based lobbying organisation.
As expected, "skeptics" are now denying that Muller ever was a skeptic[1]. It is unfortunate - everyone should be skeptical, but when people start pulling out new, highly speculative theories (eg, the latest one - which I saw on HN - is that cosmic rays are responsible for climate change) to attempt to explain climate change it's hard not to think they are just denying for the sake of denying.
