True.
I happen to be a "real scientist". I'm not a climate expert, however I do seem to recall that for a phenomenon to be explained by anything more than an hypothesis, it requires rigorous testing.
"Global warming" and/or "climate change" to my mind appear to be inadequately tested hypotheses. As such, they/it would require much more rigorous testing (including funding the skeptics to do their best) and inviting the results to be presented in well-known scientific forums.
There is no such thing as "settled science"; and, if there were, it would only be after fair and thorough investigations and open debates, and would necessarily involve lengthy, fair deliberative process. (And even then, contrary opinions and evidence would STILL be welcomed and not ridiculed).
Unless someone can convince me differently (and I invite opposing views) global warming does not even describe an observable phenomenon, only some aggressively tweeked models.
.
That is the beauty of Global Climate Change.™ It is so much more flexible than Global Cooling or Global Warming ever were.
Is it warmer than usual today? That is proof of Global Climate Change.™
Is it colder than usual today? That is proof of Global Climate Change.™
Is it wetter than usual today? That is proof of Global Climate Change.™
Is it dryer than usual today? That is proof of Global Climate Change.™
Is it cloudier, less cloudy, windier, less windy? It doesn't matter! No matter what the weather happens to be, it is proof of Global Climate Change.™
Everything is proof of Global Climate Change.™ Nothing is evidence against it.
Of course, it is all Bush's fault. Bush and those damned SUVs. Womyn and minorities will be hardest hit.
Thank Algore that a solution has been found. All we need is more central government control. This time, communism will work!