http://www.ocregister.com/ocregister/opinion/nationalcolumns/article_1804986.php

talks about how the raw data bug was found and corrected.

In other words, the record highs and all that that are the source of the global warming discussion is the result of a bug in NASAs raw data calculations.

BTW, note that the temperature variation is well less than a degree.  Pretty steady temperatures really.

I may be wrong, but I believe the ole Earth has been through a few ice ages. After each one, there is...you guessed it...global warming. The difference this time is that there are people capable of measuring it and plenty of reactionaries willing to panic about it...on live TV...48/7.

The trend is up in any case, and even if it's only 2 degree variation, it only needs 1-2 degrees to make a difference. 1 degree change is 100 meters in swiss alps so if temperature is 1 degree higher it means glaciers are shrunk by 100 meters.

Also I would like to make you check your facts about temperature readings being a joke anywhere except the countries you mentioned. I know for a fact that in Finland they have measured them since 19th century and here in Switzerland we have the data from 1864 even online. That data shows a steady trend or temperatures rising. Since 1864 it has been about 2 degrees. http://www.meteoswiss.admin.ch/web/en/climate/climate_since_1864/tt_rr_1864.html I'm sure most of the european countries have similar data available from 19th century too.

It may be that there are countries that don't have reliable data available from last century or so, but there was civilizations and scientists earlier too in the old continent you know.

In general you seem to disregard the whole issue of global warming because US space agency had a flaw in their records. Do you think all the reports about global warming are based on that data, or that data alone? In general warming by itself doesn't cause that drastic changes, itäs melting ice and vaporises more water (causing more heat), but it changes the weather model we have gotten used to and we can't predict how the weather changes and what impacts it will have in the future. One indicator close to US is the amount of strong storms from the Atlantic. You have more than 3 times more heavy storms than for example 50 yeas ago.

Sooo.... We've been collecting data for how long now? About 150 years? Reliably? (I doubt it, until recently.) I have always maintained that ~50 years of highly variable data is way too insignificant to predict trending on a geologic scale. Its like predicting annual stock performance by only looking at the prices over a span of a couple hours.

That data shows a steady trend or temperatures rising

Since we are still coming out of a mini-ice age, would that not be the norm?  And the bottom line, when you cut through all the hysterics, is that no one knows what, if any, impact man is having on the global temperature.  A correlation between the sun's activities, and the mean temperature of the earth shows a much closer correlation than blaming man for the changes - which does not correlate unless one doctors the data (confine the sample, and eliminate certain years).

Humans are like a pebble in the Atlantic to the Earth. I bet we don't affect the Earth nearly as much as we want to think we do. As George Carlin once said, the Earth wanted plastic, so it created us to make it for her.

"Why are we here?"

"Plastic."

MM turns into Liberalman. well draginol the ww2 highs can be explained simply due to all the explosives going off during that 4 year period, and all the anger you conservative war mongers had while you were deposing a lawfully elected leader {Hitler}.

The sky is falling and arguing against it just shows how little you neocons care for mother earth, plant a tree, ride a bicycle, do something useful instead of arguing with proven facts.

Temperatures went down during World War II.

And look at the steep decline from 1955 to 1970. Almost a full degree in 15 years.

There's nothing there that remotely implies human causation.

Let's face it, if temperatures were going down, you would have the same exact people finding a different hypothesis to blame humans for it.

People have been blaming other people for the weather since the beginning.  Nowadays, it's through pseudo-science instead of through sorcery or witchcraft but it's the same mentality.

They did. It was called Global Cooling then and it was man's fault as well.

"Nowadays, it's through pseudo-science instead of through sorcery or witchcraft but it's the same mentality."

People practicing witchcraft and sorcery ARE controlling the weather. At least, in New England. How else do you explain the random weather patterns we have? It's cold one day, hot the next... it's got to be an epic battle of weather-control by two powerful sorcerers. It's the only logical explanation.

At least in Michigan, once it gets cold it's winter... in New England, it gets cold, then it's hot, then cold again, then hot again...

People practicing witchcraft and sorcery ARE controlling the weather. At least, in New England.

(with a smile) That can't be true because the Christians killed all the New England witches! Might I recommend a trip to The House of Seven Gables?

Ok, back on topic. Dr. Guy is right, and I just wanted to put a citation here for people interested. Global Cooling.

We thought we had. But, like a herd of buffalo, we only killed off the weakest... the strongest were better for it!

I'm old enough to remember those dog days in the 30s!

The only way to see if we are the cause of excess global warming is to control for the Earth's natural tendency to warm. Either way, we are the cause of a lot of global problems.