The question isn't whether "global warming" or "climate change" is real, it's whether or not it's man made. That is where the disagreement should be had.

The earth goes through cycles, that is fact. There is a lot of published material from centuries ago where the average recorded temperature was at times much higher than it is today. So what does that all mean? I want the scientists to figure it out, but for the love of God do it without picking liberal or conservative. Tell us the truth without using politics!

97% of scientists are in agreement that it's human-caused. Without knowing a lot of the hard numbers, i would tend to side with them just because the Carbon Cycle has indeed been massively disrupted by human action, taking carbon that should have been consigned to the earth's crust for thousands or millions more years and pumping it all out in the span of about 200 years can't be the best thing.

Was he being deliberately obnoxious in a satirical sort of way?

Global warming has been dead as a going concern since Climategate 1 and 2*--that anyone is still convinced this is happening is a testament to the raw power of the notion that if you tell a lie often enough, it becomes truth.

*Much, much longer than that if youve actually been paying even the slightest bit of attention and you weren't getting all your news from blogs and the MSM, e.g. scientific papers and the like.

Yes, I can see how that kind of education fits the stereotype of americans. Must be true then.

This made me laugh.

Global warmin'=for real.

Those numbers aren't remotely correct.  You are confusing "beleive global warming exists" with "is man made" and further confusing "is caused by humans" with "is caused at least in part by humans."

Furthermore, in general the number that consensus has been based on has shrunk since recent sattelite data has had a hard time finding global warming in atmosphere, which is weird since global warming should be happening quicker there in the ground. 

For the last... 10-15 years or so there hasn't actually been any global warming.  There has when using impercise methods like weather stations... sattelites... not so much.

with the only response really being "It's at the bottom of the ocean."   which coincidentally is the one area nobody can really measure.

There has however been a recent interesting theory that the current lack of a global warming trend has been caused by China, and it's use of coal.  Coal dust, being a global coolant.  

Although this is an alarming note, because if this IS the case, that likely means real global warming is far higher then predicted... meaning we'd likely already be screwed.

Here's the China Coal article by the way.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-14002264

It's interesting, because if it weren't for skeptics, we'd know less about climate science, sicne for some god damn reason science doesn't act like scientists anymore and don't actualy want to look at why their data doesn't stack up unless someone presses them on it.

Global warming is a lie. All man made carbon emitted to the atmosphere accounts for just over 1% of the total emitted. Infact these last few years there has been no warming at all.

and you seriously believe that stuff lobbyists tell you?

1% ? Since 1800 the carbondioxide levels in the air increased from 280ppm to 400ppm now, without any abnormal levels on volcanic activity going on, but funnily the industrial revolution made us burn a lot of fossil fuels (carbondioxide bound as oil/coal/gas) in the same time frame..

there was a single big erruption in that period, which was the Krakatoa eruption in 1883 (no, mount st hellens wasn't big - Krakatoa eruption was 17 times as big) and it's influence on atmospheric CO2 levels was minimal

in the millenia up until 1800 the atmospheric CO2 levels were very constant at 270-300ppm even with larger volcanic activity periods like between 1600-1700

And it's not only the atmosphere that contains larger amount of carbondioxide than before, the oceans do aswell. They are a big big CO2 reservoir, as they bind atmospheric CO2 as carbonic acid, which makes up for >95% of the acidity of the oceans. This acidity of surface water has increased from 8.25 to 8.14 pH during that time (with lower pH ofcourse meaning higher acidity, but well that's middle school knowlegde).

This is what people found out with good, unbiased, professional, long-term, meticulous science.

1% of that is anthropogene? I don't think so my friend, I don't think so.

In the last few years we were experiencing a solar minimum of almost historic proportions, in 2010 there were hardly any sun spots for month. Counter-intuitively less sun spots = less solar activity = less energy radiated from the sun = less energy absorbed and radiated as infra-red ray (heat) here on earth. Such a big minimum has last been recorded by observations in the 17th century during the Maunder minimum, a period which is known as the main phase of the "little Iceage".

We didn't have a temperature drop though, in fact we had a shallow increase - take that however you like.