Since the level of carbon dioxide continues to rise, global warming under the models should be going up and man is responsible.
Problem:
Global greenhouse gas emissions have risen even faster during the past decade than predicted by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and other international agencies. According to alarmist groups, this proves global warming is much worse than previously feared. The increase in emissions “should shock even the most jaded negotiators” at international climate talks currently taking place in Bonn, Germany, the UK Guardian reports. But there’s only one problem with this storyline; global temperatures have not increased at all during the past decade.
I don't buy the assumption that any global warming is man-caused. I'm not even convinced that the fluctuations we see (and they have gone up since the late 1970s until recently) are significant when you look at the changes over centuries. Nor am I even remotely convinced that the climate models bear any relation to reality. They have not predicted the last decade's plataeu and they can't be used to explain our past temperature changes (if they can't post-dict what we've already seen, why believe the future they predict?). I'm not even convinced that warming climate is bad. If this is such a rigourous science, shouldn't the climatologists be able to tell us what the perfect global temperature is? I'm just mildly suspicious that we happen to live at the exact point when the average temperature is perfect.
And I certainly don't think that the big-government, high-taxing and regulation-heavy solutions to control our lives to "solve" thr problem is the proper reaction even if we are causing the climate to warm and assuming that getting warmer is bad.
But we stopped warming for now. So as far as I'm concerned we aren't even close to the point where we need to debate "solutions."
UPDATE: Grin. Scientists see a quiet sun--for perhaps decades--starting in about a decade:
But scientists say it is nothing to worry about. The effects from a calmer sun are mostly good. There'd be fewer disruptions of satellites and power systems. And it might mean a little less increase in global warming.
The last decades has seen global temperatures flat. So a quiet sun means a little less than zero increase in global warming, then?
It's science, people. Don't deny it. It makes you sound all Rapture-y
UPDATE: More on the sun:
What may be the science story of the century is breaking this evening, as heavyweight US solar physicists announce that the Sun appears to be headed into a lengthy spell of low activity, which could mean that the Earth – far from facing a global warming problem – is actually headed into a mini Ice Age.
I know what you are thinking. How can mere observation dent the certainty of Nobel Prize-winning climate change models that insist we must be warming by leaps and bounds because of the tiny amount of carbon dioxide we put into the atmosphere?
I remain shocked--shocked, I tell you--that the big hot fusion reactor in the sky affects our temperatures. Sure, our temperatures fall and rise depending on whether we are faced away from or toward the sun, but who knew there was more to it than that over longer time scales? It makes no freaking sense when you compare that to the models! (PBUI)
So when does the federal government start offering tax credits to buy big gasoline-burning SUVs to combat deadly global cooling?
Wait! Does this also mean we can have our damn incandescent light bulbs back?
