It should be obvious that there is politics involved in climate science. There is just too much money and urgency involved. This means also corruption, because science is not clear and it is very difficult and everyone wants to see what the wish most.
However, Jed is very right that overall ideas behind climate change are very solid. Of course there is lots of room for criticism as there are big uncertainties, however basic are on very solid ground. Best way to measure the climate change would be to measure the total heat content of oceans. This gives reliable result, if there is net warming or cooling or random fluctuations. Too bad that there is very little data available from Ocean heat content. However we have good data set from the last 10 years and thus we could see the trend in climate with very good accuracy within the next 10 years. As I have previously personally pointed out, that I prefer geoengineering over cutting carbon emissions. This is because, if Europeans would buy their food from Africa where there are the most fertile untouched farm lands, the regrown temperate European forests would absorb all European carbon emissions. Forests have very favorable effect on water cycle so regrowing forests is the best way to geoengineer the planet. Later in 2020's and early 30's vertical farming will bring food production back to Europe. And when vertical farming is the major way to grow food, there is no more environmental worries, because 98 % of all environmental degradation is caused by traditional agriculture. —Jouni
