Mark,
ārecordedā history is only a fraction of the period of ānaturalā history. Scientists have to dig deep in the earth to ārecordā temperatures experienced prior to man recording actual temperature. It is amazing how core samples reveal the changing nature of landscapes with areas now deserts and were yet once covered in vegetation and tropical plantlife recovered deep under Antartic rock and snow.
The world is not static and in our timeframe on this planet we will notice changes, although in the big picture, these observed changes will be very subtle. Weathermen will tell us that in the last century the highest recorded average temperatures have been in the last decade. If weathermen had been around in the years prior to the last ice age then they would have told us that the lowest average recorded temperatures were being experienced. Nature evolves and we must evolve to survive. Global warming is a big issue, but is what we are seeing simply nature at work, or are we really responsible?
A scientist with an 'issue' will find evidence in nature to 'support' his theory, but does that mean that he is correct? Several years ago a top scientist was found to have mailed anthrax powder to several leading politicians. Although it was later discovered who was responsible, due the 'dna' of the particular strain of the anthrax, the Federal Government still budgetted over $5 billion dollars towards anti-terrorist measures in controlling weapons of mass destruction. The particular scientist was peeved that funding had been cut on his research and took measures to bring the issue to public attention. Are global warming 'experts' utilising world opinion and, much like the 'war on terror', simply scaring the population into believing that a problem exists?