I've seen other graphs that show world-wide temperature variation over thousands of years, and right now we're on an upswing, but far from the peak this graph indicated we've had in the past. What's problematic is that we don't have enough valid scientific data to understand what the "typical" temperature variation of our planet is. Considering the timeline is measured in thousands of years, our 150 (or 400) year blip at the end is just that - a blip. What we need to know is whether our current temp variation is statistically significant or not. I could very well be that we're right at the historical 50% (average) mark and just happen to be on the rise in recent decades. We could very well be safely in the range of normal statistical temperature variations of the planet. Point is that without enough data samples, making conclusions from an observed trend in an arguably a small sample of data is nothing more than speculation.

 

I agree with what you're saying, especially since the science surrounding our earth's temperature control system is really in it's infancy. The idea that the science is concensus and that we can stop studying is silly. It is "plausible" that there are drivers that we haven't measured/noticed/dreamed of, that regulate in ways the model's won't reflect.

That being said, this latest report is somewhat of an admission that the proxy data isn't as accurate as previous assertions. The scientists have pulled back from the previous claim that current temperatures are hotter than any time in the last xxxx? years as previously claimed. Was it 1000, 2000 or 10,000 before this report came out?

That being said, co2 is on the rise like never before and even if it was warmer 700 years ago than it is now I can't conclude that the co2 increase doesn't matter.

More research I say. But how can private companies make research more profitable so we taxpayers don't have to foot the bill.

 

Worthywads,

The problem with CO2 is that it is an externality and therefore not logically factored into a free market solution. Let alone we'll overproduce. It's like any other pollutant in that sense. The closest market based solution is some kind of CO2 tax. But CO2 taxes are unpopular and fashioning one that correctly reflects the potential harm caused by CO2 would be difficult, because we don't have the models for that yet. However, sitting back and doing nothing while the problem continues to become more severe seems to be a mistake.

Norris

 

It's hot here in Ga. It's REALLY hot. We're pushing almost 100 degreese and not even July yet. We usually peak here in August. Our news here, and and many people say it's because of global warming and we better do something about it now. This is the first hot summer in many, many years and in the milder summers was considered proof of global warming and people were very vocal about it. Scientific data backed it up.
I've also heard that we are gearing up for another record-breaking hurricane season like last year. The only thing I have with that is last year wasn't a record according to the Nat'l Hurricane Center.

It's the darned if we do and darned if we don't, and the wildfire spread of misinformation which keeps alot of folks like myself unsure of it all.

The problem about a tax is much of the world already have one with Kyoto.
I've also heard that most countries which signed on find it better to just pay the tax rather than reduce emissions.