No we're not. But I don't agree that there is any urgency as I can't find any evidence that we're approaching some 'tipping point' that will wipe out the human race.

As I've stated earlier I think that letting developing nations carbonise for now is they way to go. My understanding is that most developed nations are already decarbonising, simply because they can afford to without loss of life. Taking away coal fired power from nations such as Indonesia, Thailand, China, India, Vietnam and numerous African countries would likely result in massive loss of life.

An ETS which imposes trade restrictions on nations emitting the most carbon seems to be the way most politicians are leaning to deal with this issue, but to me it just seems dangerous. 

So we had better know what we're doing before making any drastic changes and start starving the world's poor. Even if we were to spread the wealth to help with adaptation, once again the corrupt politicians of developing nations would line their pockets as they are sovreign nations, accountable only to themselves.

It's fairly obvious why the climate models are crap, first the margin of error in them is enormous, secondly, they can't even simulate water vapour and clouds to any degree of accuracy, and worse still, is even with decades and decades of data the models can't even back check to any accuracy. The models are utter shit.

Also the following link highlights the futility of atempting to reduce global CO2 emissions, as the largest emitter (I refuse to use the word pollutant, CO2 is not a pollutant and it's not negative to health), China, simply doesn't give a fuck and is only interested in economic growth, of which the cheapest dirtiest coal helps the most with, and with China acting in such a way, do you really think that India, the third largest emittor, is going to give a shit and not try and shortcut their way to western prosperity?

http://www.thegwpf.org/content/uploads/2015/12/Truth-about-China.pdf

i just came here to say that you global warming zealots should just stop playing videogames, stop browsing the web, stop driving your cars, go off grid and really practice what you preach, otherwise you're just blowing hot air. stop being such posers. 

i have news for you: windmills/solar panels isn't going to provide enough energy reliably to enjoy all of the modern conveniences you're used to

To me it's all business at this point, especially the extremely brutal climate regulation in the EU. I think the only reason Europe is so crazy about anti-CO2 policy, is cause "green energy" is ridiculously expensive and developing it cost Germany a shit-ton of money and if they don't force other countries, nobody will buy it from them and they'll never earn money on it. Similar situation in France, but it's nuclear power in their case. It's all about money, nothing else.

France's per electricity costs are actually a fair bit lower than the OECD average. France is a great exaple about why we need to stop building oil and coal powerstations, you get cleaner energy and energy that isn't really any more expensive.

Yeah, but that doesn't include the costs of setting up these nuclear powerplants, does it? This opinion and European policy ignores the fact, that different countries have different possibilities. In the case of Poland, we have 85% of Europe's black coal:

We have huge brown coal resources as well. So why the heck would we want to invest in nuclear, solar or wind energy? Why would we stop using cheap coal? No reason, so we are being forced, mainly by Germany, to purchase these stupid windmills (despite not having sufficient winds to make them effective) and wasting money on their other "green" technologies.

It's nothing more, but the stronger and richer keeping the weaker one in a chokehold and forcing him to hand over his money.

No, but France built thier Nuclear Power plants when regulations were much much lower (they are currently grossly and unnecessarily high and far to many, the main cost of building the damn things are regulation followed by the 3m thick containment shell they need to have, which IIRC can only currently be produced by one company in japan, and again this is for the old crappy nuclear power stations, almost all of the 3rd, 4th and 5th gen stations have different desings that either reduce this, or get rid of this entirely, I particularily like those that use the current spent fuel as their primary source of fuel, and those that use thorium in a LFTR design) and such the cost of production was much lower, and if you're going to play that game, then coal, gas and oil powered power stations also cost a fair deal, and the cost of solar and wind is simply disgusting. Also for 70-80 years of use 3 or 4 billion spent on a reactor that's going to provide such monstrous ammounts of energy is not a lot of money, it's just a lot upfront.

And of course Poland should still be using it's natural resources, it'd be stupid if it didn't, as at the end of the day, whichever way to cut it, economically Poland (no offence) is at least 2 or 3 decades behind being on the same general level of the Germany/France/UK/Holland of a GDP per capita of 40-50k, but that doesn't mean that for the US, UK, Germany, Holland, Japan. Australia, South Korea, Italy etc, that it's not a good idea to switch over to nuclear, I mean FFS is should have happened by now, but the anti-technology, anti-human, anti-progress moronic fuckers that make up the green movement cried foul about an industry where they don't even understand the basics, and vehemently fought to have plants shut down and to get the governments to stop investing in the technology. Investment in Nuclear power is pathetic compared to pretty much every other form of power generation, other than Hydro, but that's for different reasons. 

Climate change is definitely happening. Here in Bucharest we had the hottest day of February since 1961! The month of December was also MUCH hotter than usual! There was less snow than in past years, too.

As I've said, it all depends on a country and it's possibilities - something that the UE regulation totally ignores. In the Polish case, we have a shitton of coal, almost the whole coal of Europe - but this means that other big players have next to no coal, so they want to cut on coal energy, cause why not? They won't care. And while you are right that coal energy, mines and powerplants also cost, the difference is that if we wanted to get a nuclear powerplant, we'd have to buy a French or a Russian one. If we wanted more "green" energy, we'd be forced by EU regulations to buy German technology. If we stick to coal, we do everything on our own and the money stays in our economy. And we're talking about a disgusting sum of money here. Also, coal energy is cheaper, which helps the whole economy, which as we all know - has some catching up to do. Recently our Minister of Development said he estimates it'll take us 16 years to catch up with the West. Hope he's right, but so far he seems to know his stuff very well.

If a country has a lot of sun (Spain, Italy, etc.) - they may go for solar, if it has a lot of wind (Denmark, etc.) - it can go with wind energy, if it has a lot of rivers (Norway) - it can go with water energy, if a country has no reasonable alternative, it should go nuclear, but if it has massive supplies of fossil fuel, it should be allowed to use it!

Also, the morronic thing about EU policy is that it is designed, so that the purchase of German technology is the easiest and best solution, despite it not being reasonable in a given country. That's mainly because of the short terms they force on countries to achieve the given goals. We are forced to buy these stupid German windmills, despite the fact that we have very weak winds and these instalations make no sense. A few years ago, solar panels were also promoted, but we don't have much sun, so it's ridiculous as well. They aren't economically viable and people didn't care and despite financial reimburstment, ignored it. The cost of maintenance was higher than the worth of energy generated (seriously, my friends were thinking about it and did the calculations!).

The only "green" energy that's viable in Poland is the usage of high-energy plants, but hey! That would mean no easy cash for other countries and we'd need a bit of time to build the proper infrastructure, to convince the farmers to start growing these plants, etc., so that solution is out of the question, cause the timetable is sacred!

EU in a nutshell :P

This also means that it was hotter in the past, doesn't it?

In the middle ages, there was wine production in Poland. Go ahead and try growing grapewine over here now.