*********************AN EXCERPT ************************************
So one awkward question you can ask, when you’re forking out those extra taxes for climate change, is “Why is east Antarctica getting colder?” It makes no sense at all if carbon dioxide is driving global warming. While you’re at it, you might inquire whether Gordon Brown will give you a refund if it’s confirmed that global warming has stopped. The best measurements of global air temperatures come from American weather satellites, and they show wobbles but no overall change since 1999.
That levelling off is just what is expected by the chief rival hypothesis, which says that the sun drives climate changes more emphatically than greenhouse gases do. After becoming much more active during the 20th century, the sun now stands at a high but roughly level state of activity. Solar physicists warn of possible global cooling, should the sun revert to the lazier mood it was in during the Little Ice Age 300 years ago.
Climate history and related archeology give solid support to the solar hypothesis. The 20th-century episode, or Modern Warming, was just the latest in a long string of similar events produced by a hyperactive sun, of which the last was the Medieval Warming.
What I would like to know is what exactly is the horrible downside of global warming? It seems to me that there are a lot of people in the Eastern half of the US that would like to see a little global warming right now. I bet that Florida is going to have a whole new crop of Democrats moving there this summer, probably enough to cure that housing downturn.
I think the best refutation of the made-man climate change is that Algor & Co. models can't recreate the climate change that has already happened from known measurements.
Basically, they won't include the effects of the Sun, let alone the cosmic ray hypothesis, either.
I like the idea of refunds for the inconvenience, poverty, and deaths they're going to cause, if they get their way.