Alexis, you are parroting a whole lot of bad science there – not established, and not likely. The proven relationship of CO2 to temperature over human history (say, 25,000 years), and before that, is very loose. And it is the crux of the argument, not a fact, that even all the dumping humans do has any significant effect at all. So it is unclear if the CO2 is cause or effect of temperature change, most likely effect.

twobyfour, it occurred to me the other day after another post here that the *established* (and only recent) rates of global warming, anthropogenic or not, don’t seem to promise real trouble for about 300 years. Coincidentally (?!) that is just about when fossil fuels will pretty much run out, at anything like current and linear projected rates, including coal and oil sands.

Now, I guess it would be better if we do NOT run ourselves dry of carbon fuels, we should cut back, get into sustainable modes, and keep them around for industrial purposes if not fuels for a while longer, but it looks like the economics of all these things will pretty much take care of itself!

Note that wherever “peak oil” is, ten years in the past or ten in the future, we’re likely pretty much sitting on it now, and the price is going to trend up over the next century in any case – again, forcing us to alternatives, AGW or not. The whole AGW thing will be one with phlogiston and epicycles in another ten years, I figure.