Once again, Brian, the real issue is not what the temperature is, but what influences it. A bunch of those scientists, and the U.N. as well, relied on the East Anglia bunch as the basis for their decisions, and they have been lying. Of the 2 or 3 (I'm kidding) scientists that disagree with the carbon/temp relationship, most believe the sun is the culprit. True, if the temp. rises a bunch, it will be different then today, but not necessarily a bad thing. In the past, warm trends have produced great boons for mankind. In any case, mankind's ability to change global climate is very small indeed. If carbon IS the culprit,(and again, data does not support that it is) man's contribution to the overall carbon levels worldwide are very small. It's easy to tie this stuff into the pollution venue, and anyone would be foolish to argue that polluting is better than not polluting, but that is not the issue. Though it gives the impression of a moral/enviro high ground, it avoids answering the question of what exactly is causing any climate change. It is not a done deal.
