They Must Be On The Take From Big Oil

A study published in Nature Geoscience claims that past increases in temperature may be due in large part to factors other than CO2 increases. In fact, only about half of past temperature gains can be explained using current climate models. Of course, we all know that anyone who questions or denies the absolute certainty of global warming is anti-science and probably on the take from industry. Meanwhile, no scientists who support global warming are getting any money at all, and Al Gore hasn't enriched himself many times over by buying and hawking "green". And there's no chance at all that trying to predict something as complicated as THE SIMULTANEOUS INTERACTIONS OF EVERY NATURAL SYSTEM ON THE PLANET FROM WEATHER TO SUNLIGHT TO GEOTHERMAL ACTIVITY might be a little beyond the capacity of our current computer models...

I'm in the same camp as Charles Krauthammer on global warming. Instinctively it seems to make good sense that pumping tons of extra CO2 into our atmosphere is probably not ideal behavior. I'd like to see it reduced as much as is practical. However, remaking our entire economy, giving the government vastly expanded control over our daily lives, denying impoverished 3rd world nations the right to improve their lot, and generally placing people in a subordinate position to the environment, all while castigating any scientist who utters a peep in opposition seems like a bit much based on the evidence we have so far. Climate modeling is inexact because our measurements of historical temperatures and carbon dioxide levels are inexact, our understanding of solar activity is inexact, our understanding of the atmosphere is inexact, our understanding of the ramifications of higher temperatures for land and ocean life are inexact, and our understanding of the interconnections between all of these natural systems are inexact. Why in the world would we commit economic suicide without better evidence?