DING! "Hey, it's ready. Can you grab the earth out of the microwave?"

Those Canadians look to be really raising the temps to new heights by 2009!

someone left the thermostat up to high.

It was so hot...

I saw a fire hydrant begging a dog to pee on it

We are soooooo dead

So, what I get from the graph is that, the industrial revolution started Global Warming in 1800, 50 years before the industrial revolution began.

For a deeper understanding:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glacial_period

So why are my summers still so shit ?? I'm going out tomorrow to find a few old fridges with some good old cfc's in them and releasing them and doing my part in operation "a few days of bloody sunshine would be nice in 2012" !

Makes me want to live forever just to see if we can survive until the next ice age

Yet more bullshit about global warming.
Geology shows it was hotter in the 1300.

Australia is doing well considering you can fry a egg on a car hood during summer months

Finally, the white witch is gone and the long winter is ending.

btw, who measured the temperatures all across the south american rainforest and african deserts in 1900?

because of factory..........

you realize that red means +2°C from what it was back 200 years ago? so everything is fairly ok ;-)

OMG. Seriously? People will believe anything if it's presented right. So just how were temperatures measured in 1800? Lick your finger and hold it up? Was there a standard for temp measurement? Was there a central reporting agency? How did they get readings from central and mountain areas in the US when Lewis and Clark hadn't even started their expedition yet? There were readings being taken up through Quebec all the way to the arctic circle? They're basing world wide temp in 1800 on "readings" on land from less than 10 % of the planet?
The earth is 4 billion years old, but we think we know everything based on about 60 years of reliable temp readings. Boy, aren't we smart........

#8 CFC's are extremely stable molecules that don't react with anything until they reach the stratosphere, where UV radiation from the sun breaks them apart, allowing the chlorine to react with (and destroy) ozone. Ozone absorbs UV radiation. More CFC's means more UV at the surface, which means more skin cancer for humans, among other planetary ills.

CFC's have nothing to do with global warming.

#15 Argument from personal incredulity and personal ignorance, all wrapped up in one. Very impressive. You don't understand how temperature is measured historically, so therefore no one has that information. And your utter ignorance of the science involved doesn't deter you in the slightest from pontificating. You might benefit from looking up the Dunning-Kruger effect.

200 years is in no way long enough to show a planetary pattern. This planet as gone from desert to ice age many times with no help from man. Mt.Saint Helens put more pollutants into the atmosphere in the first 1 1/2 of its eruption than all of man kind since the dawn of the industrial revolution.First they said aerosol was a problem, they are gone,then they said it was a hole in the ozone.The ozone layer is gas.Ever try to drill a hole in a layer of gas? Had they said it was getting thin I might buy it . So the hole thing was dropped now it is CO2. The problem is the density of carbon dioxide is around 1.98 kg/m3, about 1.5 times that of air.So tell me how it floats up into the upper atmosphere and makes trouble? Damn people this is high school chemistry 101. P.S. 95% of all global warming research is based on the starting work of 2 gents that were outed has having lied about their findings.It was in the news for a weak and now they act like it never happened.Come on people use the brain evolution gave you.

In the future people will be ashamed of us because of people like #6 #10 #15

Its not about whether its proven for sure, its about the POSSIBILITY and the risks. Another example is how messed up the nitrogen cycle is due to fertilizers, or how exctinction of single algae species can reduce the primary production of ecosystems dramatically. All that seems small now but will affect humanity one day.

Does anyone remember that as sure as they are that the earth is warming now, in the 1970's scientists were just as sure that the earth was cooling and were warning us of a coming ice age. Seems to me they must have had the same data.......
Hmmmmmmm........

#20 With more data comes more certainty. And also, it's a myth that the scientific consensus was the Earth was cooling in the 70s.

http://scienceblogs.com/stoat/Myth-1970-Global-Cooling-BAMS-2008.pdf

#21 No myth. I remember reading about it (it was a cover story on Time magazine) and hearing reports of it on the news.
So you mean to tell me that 10 (+/-) years more data changed 200 years of "data" from a cooling forecast to a warming forecast? Please........

#21 It is sad that as a "proof" of the "myth" of global cooling that you reference an article written by the discredited and FIRED 'scientists' who were responsible for Climategate. They had been making up false data about GW and concealing actual data that showed a cooling trend for over a decade.
William M. Connolley was even removed from being an editor on WIKI because he was skewing climate info to suit his agenda, which caused much embarrassment to WIKI.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100020515/climategate-the-corruption-of-wikipedia/

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/12/19/more-on-wikipedia-and-connolley-hes-been-canned-as-a-wiki-administrator/