See the case of Kivalina v Exxon for possible legal action against carbon fuel companies.

It is not so much a crime against humanity — as it is that humanity has abdicated its future.

Sigh.

If you misunderstood the recent nature article which supposedly supported global cooling see Joseph Romm’s analysis here:

http://climateprogress.org/2008/05/02/nature-article-on-cooling-confuses-revkin-media-deniers-next-decade-may-see-rapid-warming/

Moreover, we’ve learned a few things in the last 20 years about how the oceans heat up and how that process has sheltered us from feeling the full effects of increasing greenhouse gases. However, there is a limit to how much heat the oceans can absorb. Once that limit is reached all the heating in the pipeline will become apparent.

For more see here:

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/11/is-the-ocean-carbon-sink-sinking/

and here:

http://climateprogress.org/2007/10/26/soaring-carbon-dioxide-concentrations-sinks-saturating/

Add in the fact that we’ve been in La Niña mode for a couple of years now, and it’s not hard to understand what’s going on.

Even if Hansen’s predictions were completely wrong, which they are not, why do you ignore the rest of the paper which has proven to be very prescient? And, for that matter, what about all the other evidence?: the rapid rise in CO2, the increase in extreme weather intensity, the melting away of arctic sea ice which you don’t mention.

It’s hard to take your position seriously when you cherry pick the data in order to find something to quibble about, while ignoring all the other information and how if fits together.

The last page of his prepared remarks had a historical time-series of global mean temperature through 1987, plus predictions for various scenarios through 2019.

Well, we have 20 more years of data now – how do his predictions look so far? Wildly wrong.

Check it out – all the data here:

http://tinyurl.com/6cms9f