So... despite the fact that we don't have definite causes for previous bouts of global warming... (as in average tempertaure.  Climate change is a bad term since their is also average global cooling.)

We know what's causing this current one. 

Even though we can't rule out everything since we don't even know what caused previous ones for sure.

... what?
"Position 
"PAS General Assembly of 13 December 2007 
"on climate change, global warming and the alarming consequences
"The problem of global warming, climate change and their róŜnorodnego adverse impact on Human life and on the functioning of entire societies is one of the most dramatic challenges of contemporary times. 
"The most recent studies indicate that the content of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere increased in the last two hundred years by about 25%. If you add to that a similar increase presence in the atmosphere of other harmful gases generated by the activity man, the overall effective increase in the number of these gases in the period is about 40%, and took specific acceleration in recent decades. Facts These mean that the situation became highly worrying. 
"The emission of harmful gases (CO2, above all) runs a wide range of processes natural in the atmosphere, biosphere, hydrosferze leading to global warming. This, in turn, produces negative effects on agriculture, hydrology, demography (estimated, for example, that climate change may in the near future, deprive access to drinking water about ¼ of the world's population). 
"Announced at the end of November the current year report to the UN Special Program Development Program (UNDP) Pt. "Against climate change; solidarity in divided world "wzmoŜonej calls for international cooperation. A similar appeal to the community IPCC manages the world (International Panel on Climate Change) - This year winner of the Nobel Prize. It is a duty of Polish science and government, so as to 
thoughtful, organized and active involved in the implementation of these ideas. This requires prioritize róŜnorodnym areas and extensive research, including research into physical and biochemical mechanisms of climate change and its mathematical modeling. Should also develop appropriate technical and rules for their implementation, and economic and legal regulations limiting emissions of so-called greenhouse 
emissions in all areas of business State. 
"It is also taking measures to provide information to realize scale of public threats and the meaning of such measures unilaterally. 
"PAS General Assembly calls on the national scientific communities and to government to actively support the participation of Poland in this important endeavor. We believe that a positive step in the direction of the effects of global warming would be the creation under the auspices of the Polish Academy of Sciences Special Program Anti-climate risks and their effects. The aim would be to fund and coordinate research and other activities legal and economic disciplines relating to various aspects of climate change."
(Google Translator)

It appears clear to me that the Geological Committee does not speak for the PAN in this case.   

Man made global warming myth is one of the biggest scandals in science history and politics of post-WWII.

I can't believe how people beleiev in it when the basic data dont even support it.

It's just ridicilous that industralitation has gone on for 150 years, but the warming only happened in the last 30-35 years, and then eve n started to stabilize in the last 7 years (!). Of course warming cycles happen over hundreds of years on Earth, we all knew that since ages ago - and the overall trend is rite now a slight warming - but the correlation to human activity is laughable.


I work as a medical doctor myself, I know how hard it is to interpret scientific data and draw conslusions about causality.

If you want a good example to put this in perspective, think about this:

 - we actually still don't know such a basic thing as what is worse for the human body: eating a lot of sugar or a lot of fat. It's HUGELY debated in the medical proffession. Such a basic thing is still unsolved (when there exists only 3 basic energy sources for the human body, carbo hydrates (=sugar), fat and proteins). Dont you think this debate should have been solved by now, if these causality connections were so easy as the Climate change zealots claim, when there's 6 billion test objects on earth to prove your hypothesis on?

My patients ask me: 'what should I cut down on, sugar or fat?' and I can't give them a recommendation because no one actually knows! (but gazillions of 'experts' claim to know of course).

But here come all these global warming zealots and claim that of course the question whether human activity is causing global warming is settled! And that you're a heretic or moron or whatever if you dismiss it or even just question that claim.

Think about it.

The thing about science is that when you have data that contradicts the theory you're supposed to question the theory, not re-adjust the data ...

For the past several years supporters of the man-made global warming hypothesis have told us to ignore sunspot activity even though there was a direct corelation between sunspot activity and global temperature because sunspots did not effect the irradiance of the sun, and therefore should not increase the temperature of the Earth; a remarkably hypocritical stance being that CO2 emissions don't directly impact the temperature of the Earth either. We were told to ignore similar temperature changes on Mars and similar periods of warming on Earth, and accept the unproven theory as complete truth.

In 2008 and 2009 we had a massive drop in sunspot activity which has translated into a massive drop in average global temperatures in 2008, and 2009 is on track to being a much colder year than 2008. For example, the average artic temperature was still not above 0 degrees a couple of days ago and this is the latest day in the year in the 50 years that they have been tracking it that it has remained this cold this late into the year. There are several other statistics in ever country that are demonstrating that this winter (on the whole) was much colder than most in recent history, and (so far) this spring/summer isn't as warm as previous years.

The data indicates that the Sunspots we've been told to ignore plays a large part in the climate of the Earth. Unfortunately, the effect of sunspots has been associated to CO2 in climate models which are being used to justify policy changes that will greatly impact people's lives in a very negative way.

There is a certain element of humour to this though ...

If Sunspot activity stays unusually low over the next couple of years, and the Pacific Decadal Oscillation's cool phase gets up to "Full Strength", the US will be having average temperatures that are the lowest in a century when people start really feeling the impact of cap-n-trade.

Maybe die now or die later... as a pro cyclist I spend almost 8 hours of my day in nature, in the city I can't help but be sorry for myself and all the kids who breath in the exhaust from busses and cars. My nostrils some times even burn from the fumes.

IThe worst part is that there are ways to defend such things, no whats worse than that is that people condone such things.

If history allows the human race to look back at our paradigm today maybe we will avoid it or maybe society is too indulgent to care.

That's a different problem. I am all for cleaner air to breath, and making policy towards that direction. What's going on in Washington at the moment, has nothing to do with that.

For example, in Albuquerque, they have "no burn" days when the air reaches a point. This cleans up the air. Great idea, but don't apply it nation wide.

Fix the problem where the problem exists. When you claim the problem is the world, you then come up with a world change. One that does nothing but hurt the people on the earth. Mostly the poor ones.

Great post. Same to you HappySqurriel.

Best sentence in this thread.

It took two seconds to find this information.  I guess we really are that lazy nowadays.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/07/08/opinion/main4241293.shtml

This issue isn't about pollution, it's about carbon dioxide (you know, the stuff that plants use for food and that you breathe out?) emissions.  The U.S. pollutes far less per person than most countries of the world.