The science was in and guess what the anthropogenic model is null. Best thing to do is to learn about the issue yourself through but please do not take the word of the soothsayers below of Pegminer, Big Gryph, Gary F and so on... long term religious fanatics on this subject; sometimes called zealots. The global circulation models are the climate science and not one even came close to actual measurements since 1979 but the zealots keep coming back in a circular argument to CO2. Give it time, this yet another environmental fad will wear off and all will be forgotten, unless governments enact carbon schemes to tax and exploit... then there may be a problem civilly or criminally.
The Wall Street Journal op/ed pages have a very long history of being an outlet for anti-science denial of human-caused long term global climate change, and of the largely negative consequences this will have for the long term global economy. The author of that linked piece is an interesting quirky guy with zero expertise in climate science.
Your second link, which leads to text from the IPCC (HUNDREDS of TOP scientists publishing comprehensive reports for over 20 years), which had you bothered to read it, rubbishes the anti-science deceit in your "question":
"Since 1950, changes have been observed throughout the climate system: the atmosphere and ocean have warmed, the extent and volume of snow and ice have diminished, and sea level has risen...Many of these observed changes are unusual or unprecedented on time scales of decades to millennia."
Why the sudden trust in what the UN (supposedly) says? They've just been liars for years according to people who have no use for science or critical thinking.
Your WUWT link is broken but they are a denier rag that doesn't always present honest info nor verify sources.
There have of course been thousands of predictions and hundreds of models or more.
The fact that IPCC may say the warming is less than predicted in 07 doesn't chang the fact that the ten warmest years globally have been in the last 16 years.
You DA wannabe deniers always skirt the real issue of AGW without proving anything I have asked deniers over and over here for a peer reviewed paper written by a real climatologist published in a real professional journal. So far none of you have even found a crumb of this. You all present these BS links that really proven nothing.
>>this is the u.n.'s IPCC report that has been leaked to certain journalists...<<
No, that is a Bullshlt story about a draft report written by liars for idiots.
I predicted your question over a week ago --
>>Evidence of this has already begun and will continue as the Y!A Global Warming section becomes inundated with “questions” about new “game-changing” information from the assessment report copied from Denier blog-rags claiming that the: (1) IPCC data proves it’s the sun; (3) IPCC report admits failure of climate models, and; (3) IPCC predicts future global cooling. Sometimes stupid is funny - and sometimes stupid is just stupid.<<
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?...
This question is just stupid.
Well I have the answer for you. Not by me, but by sientists. Just released.
http://www.solarinstallerdirectory.com/b...
No logical person denies that global warming is real. However, logical people do know that the global warming we experience has nothing to do with human activities. What intelligent person would make an assumption about the condition of the global climate based on info gathered from a whopping 20 years of research? The earth is billions of years old. The temperature was actually warmer in the 13th century than it is today. It must have been all that industry that caused that heat spike.
Why should we believe you or these so-called leaks?
They are not; you are lying.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324549004579067532485712464.html
this is the u.n.'s IPCC report that has been leaked to certain journalists...
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.c…
