Global Warming?

Global Warming continues to raise it's ugly head, and I, tired of seeing it's ugly mug, decided I wanted a wanted a coherent explanation of why anyone should have to look at it. I have recently begun posting requests for such whenever I see the ugly brute, but no one has offered an explanation, until I got this one from Scott Robert Ladd on Facebook, which I really like:

Both sides are politically and financially driven, so incoherence is inevitable. I'm willing to ask questions -- yet when I do, global warming adherents get angry, and start accusing me of being a "denier." If I can't ask reasonable questio...ns, it's not science, it's politics.

Do I believe climate is changing? Yes! Of course; climate is ALWAYS CHANGING, and would be changing even if humans didn't exist, because it changed before we were here.

Do I believe humans contribute to climate change? Yes.

Do I trust computer models based on multiple large assumptions? No. I'm a scientific software engineer and a physicist by education; the current climate models often START FROM ASSUMPTIONS and are biased by preconceptions. Does that mean these programs are useless? No. Does it mean they should be implicitly trusted? No.

Heck, we just found out that visible solar radiation INCREASES during a sunspot minimum, the exact opposite of what most scientists assumed.

Should humans reduce the amount of crap we pump into the atmosphere. Yes.

However, I am skeptical (supposedly the sign of a good scientist) about the broad and invasive demands of climate change revolutionaries, particularly those like Al Gore who can't walk their talk.

While we are on the subject, here's a story that seems to imply that Mother Nature will cure the "problem" all by herself. Won't do us much good, but Mother Earth ought to be just fine.