Mike - few points. First off, as is evident for all but one of the centres that track temperatures - Hadley, NOAA, HAH, RSS and Goddard - temperatues have been declining since the turn of the century, not increasing. See the Hadley site http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/climon/data/themi/g17.htm
For more detail on the past 10 years take data from the ASCII files and graph them in a ordinary office EXCCEL. The one hold out centre is Goddard which insists that temperatues are level pegging with a slight decline since a peak in 2005.
This business about glaciers melting faster than expected is, in fact, the last piece of alarmism global warmers can point to, but the interaction between glaciers and melt water may be far more complicated than expected. The apparent acceleration of glaciers in some areas may be temporary.. see New Scientist issues of 19 November 2008 and 03 July 2008 (accessible online) where they discuss meltwater lubricating the base of the glaciers in Antartica and Greenland. It is possible it all may be a delayed reaction to what was an undoubted warming phase up to 2000 or so.
All that is arguable, of course, but you are still left with the problem that, if glaciers are melting faster than expected, sea levels are simply not behaving as they should.
See the University of Colorado site which tracks sea level heights with two satellites http://sealevel.colorado.edu/current/sl_ib_ns_global.pdf
Sea levels have been increasing at the rate of 3.1mm a year (0.31 metres over a century) since the mid-90s, not much has changed at all.. if anything there was a recent fall in that trend before it reverted to the mean.. when you see a genuine acceleration in sea level increases then get alarmed. Until then all this stuff about sea level increases counts as speculation based on projections. Forget them.

I accept that it would be a problem if these glaciers were to melt entirely, but given that our chances of stopping CO2 emissions anytime soon are close to zero, if you think there is a problem wouldn't the best solution be to start damming the water courses up near the glaciers now before they melt?

Although, thinking about it, as only a portion of the glacier melts each year, which is probably proportional more or less to the precipitation that falls on it, you could wait quite a while before you needed to do that, as the melt must be an approximation of one year's precipitation.

Even *if* it were proved that carbon dioxide did cause the warming of the late 20th Century, reducing greenhouse gas emissions "PDQ" would have disastrous effects for the wellbeing of the world's population, and achieve absolutely sod-all.

Better to spend the billions it would cost on new water saving and extraction technology that will actually do some good.

Don't repeat the attractive foolishness of something like the response to the Exxon Valdez disaster, where the clean up caused more environmental damage than the original spill.

As for "Water Wars", the favourite of the doomsayers: as has been said, for the cost of a couple of days of war, you could build desalination plants that would fix the problem much more easily.

Mike! Stick to relative numbers and forget the abstract.

If we concentrate on the abstract with this issue we all will be here until we die and have nothing resolved. In an issue such as this we must look at the quantifiable evidence and make decisions from there - that way something will actually get done.

The downs of the up and downs of the Hottest Decade on Record are not evidence the Earth is cooling. Besides the fact that global surface air temperatures aren't direct measures of changes in the Earth's energy balance (warming continues but is absorbed by oceans and used melting ice and will show up in the temp graphs over longer periods than a decade)the graph curmudgeon links to shows Every Year Since 2OOO is WARMER than 2000. How can this be interpreted as a decade of cooling? So it dips a bit on 5 year averages, but there have been similar and greater dips only to see temps rise again. Where is the context curmudgeon? Graphs like that one only have meaning in the context of climate processes. Like ENSO. Like PDO. Like GHG forcing and albedo changes. Like climate scientists do.
I'll go on taking the leading scientific institutions interpretations of such graphs over Curmudgeons!

Yes, we must reduce global warming.... Tasmania just had its coldest April day in recorded history........

"The antidote is well known. Reduce greenhouse gas emissions and do it PDQ"

well that depends on

whether you think greenhouse gases are the reason for global warming and the world is not simply goign through one of the cycles of warming and cooling which it has been through before.

and

whether you thing human activity is responsible for the increase in greenhouse gas emmissions or such levels are not attributable to non-human activity.

when faced with suspicious and conflicting evidence, the prudent course is to do nothing, rather than run off and waste time and resources attempting, quixotically, to reverse a myth..

but I see Mike Pope is still askign to reverse a myth

this is all nothing more than a cause without substance and a low attempt to impose luddite levelling upon the able and the willing, ensuring those who can and do are denied the benefit of their efforts.

Socialism by Stealth...

it is still happening...

and it is still a bucket of doggie doos

Oooh Col! I get all warm and fuzzy when I hear 'Socialism by Stealth'.

Your appearances on OLO are far too rare!

Houellebecq "Oooh Col! I get all warm and fuzzy when I hear 'Socialism by Stealth'."

'I calls it as I see it' and whilst Senator Conroy might be attempting to control our freedom of speech by censoring the internet, he does not and never will control me...

It is just another example of censorship by socialist stealth, all part of the natural steppings stones along the socialist path which, as Lenin (in reference to his helpful idiots) so accurately put that which confirms.. the goal of socialism is communism...

been there seen and remember that
and it still makes me want to vomit

It should be very clear to anyone with ears and eyes that we are being told lies & half truths and plied with exaggerations about global warming, polar bears, hurricanes, sea level, the Great Barrier Reef, threatened species, etc. For example, read this web page about hurricanes: http://www.coaps.fsu.edu/~maue/tropical/?p=8
"Global tropical cyclone activity is at historically low energy levels — not seen since the late 1970s"

There have been far too many scares and there is no problem to which we cannot adapt.

"Civilisation is what we do to protect ourselves against Mother Nature."

Col, when multiple independent lines of research reach the same conclusion the science isn't in doubt. In any case dumping billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere is not "doing nothing" and a socialist conspiracy to bring on communism by stealth? Paranoid fantasies verses the output of the leading science institutions? Guess which I prefer. It must be very frustrating that every science body that matters hasn't been stopped in it's tracks by such baseless accusations.

Ken Fabos “Col, when multiple independent lines of research reach the same conclusion the science isn't in doubt.”

Ah the mono-faceted dictates of the blinded-by-science follower of the common herd.

Cromwell’s roundhead levelers pronounced similar claims to English royalists… but Cromwell was posthumously beheaded and UK still has a monarch…

I full expect the modern day climate change levelers to experience the same, ignominious demise as Cromwell & Co (hopefully sooner rather than later).

And Ken.. .I can call you Ken? Well I will call you Ken….

plenty of other independent lines of research, Ken, say the opposite.. plus history tells us the world is in a constant state of climatic and temperature flux (ice ages etc)…

As for “Paranoid fantasies verses the output of the leading science institutions? Guess which I prefer. It must be very frustrating that every science body that matters hasn't been stopped in it's tracks by such baseless accusations.”…

I can always tell the quality and merit of a debater by their preference to “play the ball versus play the man”

Obviously Ken, you are not a good debater, since your first response to my opinion is to attack me with suggestions of “paranoia”.

So, your third rate posting effort obvious reflects the quality of your personal qualities and seriously limited ability to make worthwhile, objective analytical comment…

You believe what you want Ken and I will believe what I want

This is all a bit the same as death and destruction to all humanity from AIDS, Swine Flu, Avian Flu and every other scare campaign initiated by the manipulative (officials of the United Nations) and swallowed by morons, like our "Ken".

You and your third rate opinions and probably your leftie mates who trawl the gutters for other dullards to support your bastard beliefs will not silence or deny me my right to declare the bleeding obvious and to denounce your puerile claims.

have a nice day....

Col, when multiple independent lines of research reach the same conclusions the science isn't in doubt. In any case the continued dumping of billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere can't be considered "doing nothing" and ... a socialist conspiracy to bring on communism by stealth? Paranoid fantasies verses the output of the leading science institutions? Guess which I prefer. It must be very frustrating that every science body that matters hasn't been stopped in it's tracks and arguing your "obvious truths" result in being considerd a member of the tin foil hat brigade.