[Lucky Dog]

Hansen is actually a believer in alternate energy and new technology as the best way to address the situation.

One believes in a theological proposition. Scientific judgments are properly based upon facts and logic not belief.

My point is, very simply, that there is insufficient evidence that so-called, global warming is anything other than a naturally occurring phenomenon. Consequently, it is both premature and unfounded to assume that humankind can do much, if anything, to either mitigate, or exacerbate it.

Hansen has expressed the viewpoint…

As it is based upon unproven supposition as to the causes of so-called global warming (if such even exists), Hansen’s viewpoint is scientifically extraneous and irrelevant.

For the glacial-interglacial era, there have only been a few short periods during prior interglacials that were slightly warmer than now --

This statement, alone, logically destroys the argument that so-called global warming is, conclusively and exclusively, the result of human activity. If the global temperatures at any time prior to the industrial revolution were ever equal to, or warmer than the present, then there are obviously natural mechanisms which were responsible for that increase and could be so, again, in the present.

So the Earth may be on the verge of entering an unprecedented climate state.

Then, again, it may not…

[cogitator]

My point is, very simply, that there is insufficient evidence that so-called, global warming is anything other than a naturally occurring phenomenon.

Your point is incorrect.

Attribution of recent climate change

A quote from one of the many cited articles: "A recent paper (Estimation of natural and anthropogenic contributions to twentieth century temperature change, Tett SFB et al., JGR 2002), says that "Our analysis suggests that the early twentieth century warming can best be explained by a combination of warming due to increases in greenhouse gases and natural forcing, some cooling due to other anthropogenic forcings, and a substantial, but not implausible, contribution from internal variability. In the second half of the century we find that the warming is largely caused by changes in greenhouse gases, with changes in sulphates and, perhaps, volcanic aerosol offsetting approximately one third of the warming."

If the global temperatures at any time prior to the industrial revolution were ever equal to, or warmer than the present, then there are obviously natural mechanisms which were responsible for that increase and could be so, again, in the present.

"Could be responsible" does not mean that they are responsible. Please read the link that I provided. The scientists have assessed the contributions of natural factors and the assessment indicates that natural factors are insufficient to produce the major part of the observed warming trend.