I am glad this is breaking out slowly but surely and the C02 saga will probably be the greatest scientific scandal of our time. I have been following the story for as far as I remember as I had an interest in Ice Ages. This article <a href="http://www.warwickhughes.com/icecore/zjmar07.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.warwickhughes.com/icecore/zjmar07.pdf</a> is very good at debunking some of the myths. You can play with a model online with this <a href="http://cs.clark.edu/~mac/physlets/GEBM/ebm.htm#tiptop" rel="nofollow">http://cs.clark.edu/~mac/physlets/GEBM/ebm.htm#tiptop</a> and you can download a more sophisticated program <a href="http://www.giss.nasa.gov/tools/modelE/" rel="nofollow">http://www.giss.nasa.gov/tools/modelE/</a> from Goddard, or you can write your own Clojure one, like the one we had yesterday here at HN.<p>There is no doubt that an increase in CO2 will increase temperatures. However, this is only part of a model. C02 can get absorbed by the Oceans and other earth mechanisms and balance out. If you follow the Palaeoclimate literature (ice cores in Antartica) the rise in temperature gave a rise to C02 and not the other way round.<p>You can look how the  famous hockey stick curve looks if plotted against historical times (it looks more like a series of hills).<p>Serious variations in temperature (on a global level) are caused mostly by sunspot activity. I am sure other HN posters can add 100's more argument to these.<p>However, as humans there is no doubt that we are destroying our environment. As such I am very much for better policies in this respect but certainly NOT for trading carbon credits and fattening fat cats further.