"It was probably almost as cold as the Vikings homelands of Norway and Sweden." -- So Greenland 800 years ago was probably nicer than their homelands? That must be why they settled there until the little ice age around 1600.
While most people will not buy an air conditioner if they don't need one, lower prices will permit more people to buy them which explains higher sales. If the global temp increased by less than one degree Celcius, that is not enough to spur enough people to buy an air conditioner. That just does not make sense. It makes more sense that they waited until the price came down.
"Machinery that produces the well known 'hotspots' that hover above our citys." Don't worry, there is no significant urban heat island effect according to Hansen. Any UHI has bveen accounted for through adjustments that have lowered the 1930's temps and raised the 1990's and 2000's temps. That is the exact opposite of what would be expected. Although Hansen appears to think that the UHI in St Petersburg has declined in the past 15 years (
http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2013 ).
"In addition every particle of dust produced by automobile and aircraft engines, that absorbs heat, cannot be reflected back into space. Another example of manmade warming." The drier and colder the earth gets, the more dust there is. This is shown in the Vostok data well before the 20th century. Some dust will reflect sunlight back to space. Darker colour dust will have a warming effect.
"Well human activities are definately influencing local climate." Local climate is not global climate. Only a small portion of the earth's land surface is actually inhabited. I think the number is around 5%.
Then you change topics to air pollution. That has nothing to do with global climate change. The fact that people removed vegetation which caused deserts to spread does not affect my climate in Northern Ontario. That they are rapidly fixing that situation will not affect my climate either.
"...imperceptable over the 1 million year time scale." Hmmm, the vostok data shows 100,000 year cycles where the temperature varied by 10 degrees Celcius ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Vostok_420ky_4curves_insolation.jpg ). If that is imperceptable, then what are you complaining about 0.6 C for?
"Although I'm not quite sure what these natural phenomena are?" Are you asking? Google Milankovitch . And the Pinatubo eruption caused cooling due to light coloured aerosols' albedo affect. It took a few years for the temperatures to recover fully from that one.
"But don't pooh pooh the changes just because they were only over ten years." Your examples are simply examples of weather. That is not climate. The AGW theory states that the temperature will go up as the concentration of CO2 goes up. The CO2 levels have been increasing, but the rate of temperature increase has levelled off. Why? Try to answer that if you can.
I have run out of time. More later.
