You speak of AGW as if it were proven fact. Could you direct me to a source with the experimentally derived scientific evidence that anthropogenic CO2 is causing or will cause a significant increase in global temperatures?
To this date, I have seen none.
I would contend that if you are looking at global temperature over a period of the past 15,000 years, that global temperature has indeed been warming. However, if you are looking at a period of the last 10,000 years, the temperature has been cooling. The temperature in fact has been cooling over a period of the past 2,000 years. Looking over the past 700 years, the temperature has been relatively stable. Reducing that down even further, over the past 100 years, the temperature does dramatically increase. Yet, when you look at the last 6-8 years, it has been in stasis even though the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere has increased by 4%.
So it all depends on the period over which you are examining your data. The graph below shows that the earth has seen much higher temperatures than what we are experiencing today:
The data will also show that temperature also precedes rise in CO2 by several hundred years.
Also, if CO2 causes a rise in temperature, how do you explain the decrease in temperature from mid 1940's to the end of the '70's? If CO2 drives temperature and it does so very quickly, wouldn't you think the temperature should increase during this time?
As for consensus...science is not about "consensus" but rather about formulating a hypothesis and then testing it. "Consensus" is the opposite of true science. If consensus was true science, we would all still believe the world was flat. Therefore, instead of calling those who don't buy the notion that AGW is going to cause catastrophic climate change skeptics, I would suggest that all rational thinking scientists would be "skeptics".
As for the CH4 release, I have not read up on that, so I cannot speak intelligently about it. I will however, do my due diligence on the theory.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
