Articles railing against carbon dioxide levels often display a few impressive scientific facts about the makeup of the earth's atmosphere and then proceed to make broad and unsupported statments - such as,"the evidence is incontrovertible..virtually no one questions any more the...warming...only a small and shrinking minority are skeptical". Then, add misleading statements such as "600 experts" have reviewed the UN climate report on human induced global warming.
In response, you should consider the following:
1st - I invite you to look at various scientiific sites, including - icecap.us - to see numerous 'skeptical' scientific papers and reports DEMONSTRATING FACTUALLY why not only that there has been NO global warming this decade, but instead there has been notable global cooling the last 2-3 years.
2nd - the 'skeptics' are GROWING - in fact, quite a few scientists that originally sided with human caused global warming have - upon further research - joined the dreaded skeptics, BUT I'm unaware of any 'skeptic' that has switched sides in the debate.
3rd - science demands debate, and anytime someone infers or says 'the debate is over' , then that person is woefully lacking in understanding how science works...science, unlike politics, does not operate with a consensus - science deals in facts. Scientific pioneers such as Copernicus, Galileo, Pasteur (and hundreds of others) as well as theories such as plate tectonics had to fight the prevailing consensus, but eventually they prevailed, because the scientific evidence proved them correct.
4th - the general media has done a terrible job of researching the global warming story, and one reason is the ignorance many reporters have about science issues. Face it, up to recently, the human induced global warming crowd has had a much better publicity campaign.
5th - the '600 experts' who reviewed the United Nations climate report were generally NOT meteorologists or 'working' climatologists, and 'reviewed' does NOT mean they supported the report. In fact, many of the original supporters and reviewers have since repudiated the report.
6th - the earth's carbon dioxide levels have been shown (by ice cores, sediment studies) to have been much, much higher in the earth's recent geologic past (thousands of years) as well as the earth being warmer (examples of warmer times include the 1200-1350 period and the 200 BC to 300 AD period).. Obviously, this was well before the current industrial age, which the current global warming alarmists blame..
7th - and probably the MOST IMPORTANT point is understanding science, specifically CAUSE AND EFFECT. What most people have heard or read is that increased carbon dioxide causes temperatures to rise - indeed there seems to be a relationship - BUT, more evidence is surfacing (actually the evidence has been there, it's just recently seen the light of day) that warmer temperatures cause higher carbon dioxide levels, NOT the other way around - a HUGE difference. As the world temperatures cool, carbon dioxide is more readily absorbed by cooler oceans. This is the way weather cycles work - warmer oceans give up more carbon dioxide, cooler oceans absorb more carbon dioxide). By the way, in the earth's atmosphere and oceans, carbon dioxide is a vital PLANT FOOD - NOT a pollutant.
Finally - naural cycles produce the wide variety of the earth's weather. The predominant cycles include solar (sun) cycles to ocean cycles - by far, the solar cycles are the dominant cycle dictating earth's weather. Less active (fewer sunspots) solar cycles have always meant cooler temperatures for the earth (as well as for the rest of the solar system). Probably, the most important earth cycle regulating Earth's temperatures are the oceans. In addition, certain types and frequency of volcanic eruptions can play a significant to intense influence on the earth's climate.
Concluding, READ, QUESTION and INFORM yourself and don't let others do it for you!