Actually, the science doesn't back that claim Tedster. In fact, the science doesn't back either claim. It says only that there are natural variations in global climate, and that at the moment we're pushing it hard as well. It shows a substantial spike in tempreture since the dawn of industrialisation as a result of greenhouse gasses, and it can bve nothing else as far as they can tell
What science says is that humans HAVE warmed the earth, but that they don't know if it's because of runaway global warming, or if we've just warmed the planet a little, and it'll level out roughly where we are, or if in fact the weather will simply adapt and return to normal.
The experiment doesn't hope to proove global warming - it hopes to look at how the climate will change, and answer the unanswered questions (mainly that of whether it's GW as people understand it, or GW as a short spell of warmth, or perhaps not at all.
However, there's no doubt that humans have had an effect on climate - whatever it's been and however significant it's been.
climate change scientists already know about how solar and volcanic activity affects the climate, and their computer modelling of it over the last thosand years matches the climate we've actually had pretty well, untill the mid 19th centurey when it spikes severely. They're just trying to explain the spike. Current antartic evidence shows that the climate is currrently warmer than it has been for 10,000 years. What the scientists REALLY want to know is not just whether or not it's global warming, but wherther or not it's normal, and where it's going.
Whatever the outcome, it's still a worthy cause, being that a particular outcome isn't expected. it comes out with whatever it comes out with, and if one side of the debate doesn't like it, then so be it. It could just as easily go either way. One fact is hard to argue with, which is that for whatever reason, our climate IS changing, and we don't know how it's going to go.