It's Getting Warmer, It MUST Be Our Fault

"Globally, 2010 is on track to be the warmest year on record. In regions around the world, indications abound that earth's climate is quickly changing, like the devastating mudslides in China and weeks of searing heat in Russia. But in the world's capitals, movement on climate policy has nearly stopped."
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/23/opinion/23homer-dixon.html?_r=1&ref=opinion&pagewanted=all

Is there any evidence a climate policy could effect, even a slight amount, AGW?
With all of the information about how dodgy the science of calculating global temperature is, do we really know it is warmer than ever?  Think for a moment about the logistical challenge of measuring planetary temperatures over the necessary periods of time - gear changes, observers change, gear degrades and some is replaced while other gear is not, parking lots are built at the measuring stations, etc.  The margin of error exceeds the stated rate of temperature change.
By what means can we be sure that warming is worse than cooling?  Is the earth now at some magically perfect temperature, such that any deviation is going to cause a disaster?
What would it take to change the warming IF it was our fault?  There's nothing I've seen to indicate this is possible short of a catastrophic reduction in human population.
"Democrats in the Senate decided last month that they wouldn't push for approval of a climate bill."  This author makes this statement with the assumption that a climate bill would do something we need it to do - but the author must know the climate bill in question is largely symbolic and would accomplish so little the effect would never be measured.  The author doesn't care about that - the author is invested in the "must do something, anything, no matter the cost, to start reversing the trends" mentality.  This mindset will render us to a level of fiscal impotence that we will lose the ability to even think about changing to a non-carbon based energy system.
"Scientists aren't sure what will happen when a significant portion of the Arctic Ocean changes from white, sunlight-reflecting ice to dark, sunlight-absorbing open water." Aren't certain. Really. No kidding. As if they are certain about anything as regards AGW. If they are, it would not matter any more than their lack of certainty. They can prove nothing.  Science isn't about whether a scientist feels certain.  Science is about models which demonstrate accurate predictions - of which there are none now. 

"That's the key lesson of the recent financial crisis: when powerful special interests have convinced much of the public that what they're doing isn't dangerous, only a disaster that discredits those interests will provide an opportunity for comprehensive policy change like the Dodd-Frank financial regulations."
IOW, if you want people to lie down and let their government take control of their freedom, you have to scare the pants off of them with powerful special interests who will then have the government concoct a law that ensures all ends well for everyone but the tax payers.  Re-phrased:  "That's the key lesson of the recent financial crisis:  when powerful special interests convince much of the public that liberty is dangerous and results in uncertainty, it creates the opportunity for comprehensive policy changes like "Obamacare" which reduces freedom and subjects the entire populace to the irrationality of government run bureacracy."
"The limited slack in the world's food system, particularly its grain production, can amplify the effects of disruptions. Remember that two years ago, when higher oil prices encouraged farmers to shift enormous tracts of cropland from grain to biofuel production, grain prices quickly doubled or tripled. Violence erupted in dozens of countries."
Another laugher. What motivated farmers to shift production was the government incentives to grow corn for ethanol.  The author is so baked in collectivism, the failures of government are ignored, the limitations manifest in government's ability to exceed any motivation but the political are ignored.  The opportunity for liberty to create incentives for cooperation is ignored, while the sin of coercion, inherent in every government action is ignored.  The entire mindset is shaped by the assumption that government CAN do good, that politicians' motivation exceeds the necessity of their own re-election, and that government is justified in doing good at the expense of liberty.  They deeply believe in the power of coercion to create the outcomes they want "if only we could get the right tyrants in office to force everyone else to do things the way we want them done!"  The Greeks called it hubris when men assumed they could interfere in the work of the gods.  The term nowadays is Progressive.