Citing clearly biased websites and blogs is hardly a convincing mode of debate.

In addition – there is plenty of counter evidence to global warming. Neither side is conclusive, certainly, but your mentality that everyone who’s skeptical is a loony is just as concerning as you seem to think theirs is. In the last century or so, sea levels and temperatures have been rising, but, put in perspective, it could easily be part of a reoccurring cycle that has been observed throughout natural history by scientists.

Debates are fun and all, but referencing sources that would be considered invalid in a middle school research paper is not a good place to start.

So you obviously have no background whatsoever in the sciences, and no idea how they are funded. Good to get that on the table.

“Who is behind the propaganda:”

Instead of asking rhetorical questions why not actually do the internet search to find facts, not Denier innuendo?
“Where there’s smoke, the climate change Denial lobby ”
http://greenfyre.wordpress.com/2009/08/19/where-theres-smoke-the-climate-change-denial-lobby/

“Who funds them”
http://greenfyre.wordpress.com/denier-vs-skeptic/#who

The point about 85 billion tons of carbon is that it is in balance. The global ecosystem does indeed produce 85 billion tons of carbon but it also absorbs 85 billion tones of carbon. The system is therefore has no net gain. We now release 30 billion tones of carbon into the atmosphere, there is a net increase in carbon which is also increasing each year. This carbon dioxide changes the net radiative balance in the atmosphere and temperatures/climates change.

300 years of coal under our feet, tons of rubbish that could be burned as fuel instead of methane leaking land fill we pay tax on and locally produced biomas we produce so little of.
Instead we import windmills…So much for the carbon footprint but just think about that green energy and the green high tax that goes with it.
The choice for the future: Poor and cold or well off and warm!

Talk show hosts, political think-tanks and political blogs have been lying to you (e.g. manmade CO2 being insignificant…compared to what? Volcanoes? Nope: http://scienceblogs.com/illconsidered/2006/02/volcanos-emit-more-co2.php).

You imply you know the difference between weather and climate, but if you really did you wouldn’t used the BBQ summer comment. So check http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0JsdSDa_bM where Peter Sinclair gives explains the difference between climate and weather.

If you’re going to contradict 97% of climatologists (http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2009/01/97_of_active_climatologists_ag.php), and every major scientific organization around the world you should at least make an effort to understand the very basics.

If you’re not a troll and are seriously interested in what the science actually says (i.e. not in what some political ideologue on either side says), then check those links above. They try and link to the original work/data so you can see for yourself. Also Sinclair has a number of youtube videos now and those are a good place to get basics as well (he also references original sources where possible). The good news is that even a basic amount of education on the topic is enough to show you that most of the denier memes are lies.

If you still have questions come on over to the comment sections in realclimate, ill-considered, or greenfyre, or tamino open mind and ask there (don’t ask here as you’ll not likely get the responses you need to learn). Come in with an open mind, do not make claims that you can’t back up with evidence (like you did here), and knowledgeable commenters will be happy to help you. Happy researching.