IW- It seems from your response that you are not a scientist, and that you have been led astray by other non-scientists (such as Christopher Monckton, 3rd Viscount Monckton of Brenchley) whose opinions only matter to non-scientists, the Murdoch-owned media and the fossil-fuel plutocrats who own said media. Seen many advertisements for oil companies on the various media outlets you watch?
Despite the fact that Monckton and his cronies have had their non-scientific opinions thoroughly debunked by *real* scientists, the "fair-and-balanced" media that parrot their silly views (and I do not use the word "silly" here lightly) and put it forth as being on a spectrum of reasonable discourse, when in fact, the deniers are off in fantasy-land.
The correlation between CO2 increase in the atmosphere and global warming is clear and compelling. The famous "hockey-stick" graph of temperature rising published by Dr. Michael E. Mann should alarm us all out of our complacency. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hockey_Stick_graph . The Mann model has been investigated thoroughly (it was published in a refereed journal, after all) and found to be a very good model (the worst case is that it can be off by 0.05 degrees C).
The East Anglia controversy has also been thoroughly investigated (except for determining the identities of the criminals who hacked into the university's system... only 8,000 pounds have been spent to find the perpetrators), and the scientists were found to be completely innocent of *any* wrongdoing. There is no conspiracy on the part of the scientists. They make very little money at all and they really only have their reputations to guard. Considering that an academic scientist's reputation is the essence of their lifetime career, they do not care to publish junk. Essentially, that permanently damages their career. Compare and contrast with the fossil fuel industry, which makes $8B - $10B per quarter per company in profit, and can buy their reputations with slick ads and Faux News for the uninformed, undereducated and uninquisitive.
