No, you were wildly incorrect back then, for example in your claims that:
I would describe that as laughably wrong, except that the information is obscure enough that there's others around here who probably lapped it up as gospel truth - not really a laughing matter.
So now - after my patient efforts trying to correct your falsehoods in numerous threads - your errors are much less egregious: For example you've posted an image from the study I linked showing that
for the period 1950-2005 the ratio of night to day warming was around 1.3 to 1.
So
if you were speaking in 2005, when 57% of the mean warming in earlier decades had come from Tmin increases and the trend turnaround was not yet definite, saying that "most" of the warming was in the evenings would only be mildly misleading in its ambiguous implication of a large disparity and little daytime warming.
But you're not speaking in 2005, you're speaking in 2018 after two or three decades of Tmax increasing as fast if not faster than Tmin. For the warming which has been most recent, most rapid and almost entirely anthropogenic, your claim was clearly false.
For the warming which has been most recent, most rapid and most strongly anthropogenic, "most" of the warming has been in the warmer months and quite possibly "most" of it in daytime temperatures - almost precisely the opposite of what you declared.
A bold claim without any evidence or reasoning to back it up.
I suspect that this is yet another area of carefully-selective blindness on your part: Your adamant refusal to grasp the concept of thermal inertia, which again I've spent innumerable posts trying to explain to you. The radiative forcing of CO2 increases (~1.8W/m^2 at the time of IPCC AR5 WG1 Ch8 Figure 8.15)
will have a surface warming effect of ~0.5-0.6 degrees Celsius, but due to the tremendous heat sink effect from the oceans primarily, only a portion of that is currently manifest in measured temperatures.
If anthropogenic forcing factors remained balanced to the time at which CO2 levels are doubled, a
relatively straightforward estimate accounting for thermal inertia using timeframes with around zero or negative net solar and volcanic forcing (1960-2015) would imply more than 2.8 degrees of committed warming. A more likely scenario is that our aerosol emissions will decline more rapidly than our GHG emissions (as they've already done in Europe and NA for example) and dissipate from the atmosphere much faster, implying an even higher warming commitment by the time that CO2 concentrations double.
At the current (accelerating) trajectories, CO2 concentrations would be at 560-610ppm within fifty years, and your speculation that those trajectories will make a sudden u-turn without any active effort to curb emissions is dubious, at best.