Watching Dan and Roger go back and forth is fun ;) It's like watching two religious sects arguing when you know for a fact that neither is ever going to convert to the other religious point of view. Way back at the start of this thread, I entered it as an agnostic. Now I am definitely in the warming camp, though not because of anything in this thread. Which brings me to my next observation: Roger, if you really believe that the earth is cooling, this is not the venue to make any difference to the debate. Although I know you are cynical of the peer-review process of scientific publication, it is still the best way to make a real impact on scientific opinion. Posting up cherry-picked graphs on a backpacking forum is not...perhaps your energy is better placed somewhere else.
I am still an agnostic from a real perspective, in that I am willing to assess the different 'evidence' and make my own decisions. I accept that almost nothing in science can be truly proven, we just have to weigh up the evidence and make the best guesses we can.
As for the southern oceans and Antarctica, this is very much one of the least compelling evidence sets on both sides of the argument IMHO. Some parts of Antartica are clearly warming, others appear to be cooling, some haven't seemed to change, but even the cooling does not prove or disprove the hypothesis of overall global warming. For one, the disruption of the ozone layer over the Antarctic region in recent decades muddies the water, as does the southern ocean's apparent ability to suck down great amounts of atmospheric CO2. IF the ozone layer had remained intact, and IF the ocean hadn't been disposing of excess CO2, Antarctica may well have shown a similar across-the-board warming trend like we are seeing in the rest of the world. We just don't know.
So IF I am to accept that the earth as a whole is warming, the next question is how much of this is due to human influences versus natural fluctuations? Again, I find the overwhelming balance of evidence in favour of a lot of it being due to human influences. For sure not all of it, but enough that I feel we should take action now, rather than wait for the non-existent day when everyone agrees that this is what is happening. Yes, making these changes now comes at an economic and social cost, but we will have to make these changes anyway in the near future anyway, at perhaps a much greater cost, so why not fast-track it now?