The science is inconclusive. On record there are only approx. 130 years of data. And the data fluctuates.

Less than 30 years ago the big scare was global cooling because of years of record low temperatures.

I don’t believe anyone doubts that humans affect the environment, but I do believe the mass hysteria sheds a bad light because it's being pushed by very politically motivated individuals. The debate doesn’t belong in congress; it shouldn’t have anything to do with Al Gore, Glenn Beck, Fox News, or CNN. The political class and media are turning what should be real and intellectual research into a circus for votes and ratings were misinformation runs rampant.

Global warming coverage has become as bad as the year of the shark a couple years ago. 

I am a skeptic who believes that humans are causing the overall temperature to rise, and who doesn't buy into the political propaganda from either side.

If you want to start an honest debate, start by asking an honest (as in, not loaded) question.

Even if the agenda of global is being exaggerated for some political purpose, the theoretical risk of global warming still exists. The simple fact remains that there are more people currently alive on earth than the combined total for the rest of human history and hence our ability to impact the environment is far greater than ever before. Isn't it better that the issue is closely scrutinized now, rather than in 100 years where the damage we have caused may be too great to reverse.

Out of interest, for the people that aren't on the global warming bandwagon, what do you think is the motivation for people to exaggerate claims of global warming?

A lot of the scientists like to believe humans have a huge effect on the world and that everything else in the universe stays the same. I find it kind of funny that scientists predicted more Katrina like hurricanes and there haven't been any, more heat waves and then it snows in Pakistan and San Diego. The sun (that big yellow ball in the sky) has more impact on earth than humans do and also the orbit of the earth (no it doesn't stay the same).

It exists but is also a natural occurrence so there is no problem with it existing. It does not exist in a drastic enough amount to do permanent harm to the Earth as the Earth is very good at stabilizing itself.

This is the biggest hoax since Y2K bug

Interesting analogy. I'd just like to point out that the reason Nothing happened on Y2K was because people listened to the experts and were prepared for it.

 I'd love for Climate change to be the same way. 

I think it happens naturally but the human's actions make it happen faster than it should. That's why I do the small gestures that can slow it down. I don't know about you but, I still want to live!

By that sentence you do concede that humans do have some, however minute, impact on the planet. With that knowledge is it not reasonable to practice conservation?  Maybe recycling paper and cans? Perhaps researching cleaner and reusable sources of energy? Is that really unreasonable?

I have no problem with conservation and adopting new technologies. I just think the mass hysteria or the "global warming bandwagon" is generated for the sole purpose of scaring people into placing certain individuals into office/power, which is dangerous.

 Ever see the global plans to "stop" it?

They don't actually stop anything and instead just involve countries like the US and UK to pay massive amounts of money to undeveloped countries for carbon credits.