My understanding is that the earth has warmed and cooled many times before, prior to us (man) releasing carbon dioxide into the air. So I have tried to find out what the main cause of climate is. The theories that I have read are 1) cyclic variations invloving the sun. These include our orbit around the sun, the orbit around and through the milky way, cyclic changes in solar magnetism and solar wind. I'm not very good at regurgitating the theories I have read, but common sense tells me that we must look to causality of the main drivers, before we can really appreciate what difference human released C02 has on the climate.
All the above theories have been shouted down by the AGW side.
My question is - if the world really is warming at such an alarming rate, then surely the scientific community would welcome findings that indicate that it mightn't be so bad after all, or that other factors are the underlying cause. The pain that many people will have to go through as energy prices rise, and as food poduction is replaced with tree planting or clean energy fuels is possible immense. Why inflict that on the world if it is not necessary?
Unless of course there is another agenda.
If the AGW side welcomed debate a bit more, and were more prepared to debate openly, then there is a chance they may persuade me. But shutting down debate only causes my skeptisism I am afraid.
