Look out kid
Don’t matter what you did
Walk on your tip toes
Don’t try “No Doz”
Better stay away from those
That carry around a fire hose
Keep a clean nose
Watch the plain clothes
You don’t need a weather man
To know which way the wind blows

Deadwood, if you wonder why your inane post got through, know that it is because i want to let its inanity speak for itself : you are exemplifying the brainless anti-AGW attitude with that sort of reasoning. Is that really how you want to come though ? If you have some valid points to make I will post them, but if you have nothing better in store, i’ll hit the delete button next time.
Cheers
El Niño

My confidence that we can survive the current anti-science AGW end-of-the-world cult is eroding.

I hope you enjoyed your time. Will there be any blogging on your travels?

Cheers

Jim

Most eloquently, the Vostok ice cores tell the clear story that over the past 800,000 years, temperature and CO2 have gone hand in hand on Earth :

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/317/5839/793

Now, in those days where humans were just banging on stones with bones (or vice versa), the main driver of climate variations (we think) was the Earth’s orbital configuration, regulating the insolation received at the top of the atmosphere. CO2 and T are *responses* to this forcing, and there is pretty good evidence that CO2 acted as an amplification mechanism once the insolation started things one way or another. Hence the celebrated lag between CO2 and T that is enough for certain half-wit contrarians to throw out all of man-made global warming theory (with the bath water). Though our understanding of the carbon cycle is still incomplete, a coherent (but blurry) picture has started to form on how you get in or out of an Ice Age, where CO2 acts as a central messenger to carry climate signals throughout the globe.

Since 1850 , human fossil-fuel burning has started to throw the carbon cycle and planetary radiation budgets out of balance. This time, CO2 is not just a link in the climate chain, it is also a forcing (or in economic terms, an “externality”. Clearly sources and sinks of CO2 will change as climate itself changes, which is what makes the problem so complicated. Yet it is crystal-clear to 95% of serious scientists (even Nobel laureates without a training in climate science) that CO2 was a key player in Ice Ages and is a key player in the climate change we are experiencing now. There is no question that it will continue to warm our planet if we continue producing it in such astronomical quantities. The only question is “exactly by how much” ?
And the answers we have so far suggest : “probably by a dangerous amount”, which is what the fuss is all about.
Who are the “other scientists [who] insist that CO2 levels have nothing to do with global warming and the ice-ages”. I’d be curious to hear if they have any training in climate science… or any ties to the Cato institute