It should be pointed out that all of the models argue for an increase in temperatures in the troposphere, something that has not happened appreciably. In that regard, AGW can be said to have been falsified.

This isn`t a matter of basic physics; feedback mechanisms are critical, as this piece explains http://www.worldclimatereport.com/index.php/2008/02/21/global-warming-not-so-fast/ We do not understand the sensitivity of the world`s climate to CO2. We do not understand the effects of water vapor-the primary greenhouse gas. We don`t fully understand Milankovich cycles. There are secondary effects of a hot sun-for example, there is evidence that during warming periods the Arctic develops negative pressure as the atmosphere is energized, sucking warm air (and driving warm ocean currents) north while a weak solar period reverses this.

Recently an attempt was made by Douglas et. al to simulate the current climate using the models that are predicting catastrophe based on past data. They failed miserable.

How many molecules of CO2 are in 10,000 molecules of air? 3-4. It is a trace gas.

The point is, as Roger Revelle noted before he died, CO2 driven global warming may raise temperatures by 2*, so we are at the halfway point now, and any effort taken to stop this “runaway train“ is probably pointless. Revelle thought his brainchild more a curiousity than a danger.

The IBD editorial did indeed have a couple of mistakes, but those in no way invalidated the basic premise of the piece.

That sure is bouncing around the IntarTubes. Unfortunately, the press release from that institute includes the first part, but DIRECTLY CONTRADICTS the conclusion. http://www.mpg.de/english/illustrationsDocumentation/documentation/pressReleases/2004/pressRelease20040802/ says
“solar activity affects the climate but plays only a minor role in the current global warming”

In other words, a bald-faced lie from that editorial is now been regurgitated ad infinitum.

The big change in the earth’s climate is the rapid and continuing rise in greenhouse gases, primarily CO2, in the last 150 years. The greenhouse effect is elementary high school physics, so it would be amazing if this didn’t increase temperature. As to how much, the IPCC report is the consensus.

The big problem for the few proponents of solar variation is the cycle is only 11 years and it’s already peaked, yet average worldwide temperature has gone up for longer than that cycle and continued to rise after it ended. And most climate scientists don’t agree with the attempts to postulate additional big climate effects from solar magnetism, cosmic rays, etc.

Even if some natural effect counteracts global warming from anthropogenic greenhouse gases, the increase in CO2 is causing ocean acidification right now. And when that natural effect ends, what then?

Certain scientists and politicians saw an opportunity to advance their careers using junk science, which played right into some unconscious need of some to blame humanity for SOMETHING. Now we may see the truth of the situation.

We will not have long to wait. If insolation really is key, this summer will be unusually cold, and southern hemisphere winter will be unusually cold as well. Not too long to wait at all. Meanwhile, there is no reason to get shrill about it. Unless you see your opportunity for great career advancement fading, and thus have a need for action very quickly. The rest of us can wait a few months.