Yes, you've pointed out that there is some uncertainty in the issues I presented. Which was pretty much my point.
- Ocean acidification is really a misnomer. The pH is getting slightly lower, but still above neutral.
- Yes, carbon is naturally sequestered in several ways. There are also natural sources, such as volcanoes that replenish it in the atmosphere. There's still not very much of it.
- The net feedback in the models is very uncertain, especially due to the unknown feed backs associated with clouds. And since CO2 has been at least an order of magnitude higher than it is now, I think there's a lot of room to doubt the theory that CO2's feedback overwhelms other feedbacks is pretty shaky, no matter what the source of the CO2.
- Yes, CO2 is a greenhouse gas, but its effect is dwarfed by the #1 GHG, water vapor.
- Proxies can be useful, but only if we correctly understand the uncertainty involved.
Of course, as a backdrop to all of this is the obfuscation that's been revealed in climate science circles. The history of not sharing data, models (i.e., statistical) and computer code should at least suggest that we need to review what's already been done to make sure it's correct. A scientist refusing to share data because someone will look at it to see if the scientist made mistakes doesn't mean that he made mistakes, but it does mean that we should have less confidence in it than if he did share, and independent parties came to the same or similar conclusions.
As a parent, I do have skin in the game, and while I don't believe we're going to cause any sort of runaway climate change due to CO2, I'd rather my kids grow up in a warmer, rather than colder world. What's the 'correct' temperature, anyways?
My 'penchant for doing nothing' is only partly based on my respect and understanding of the scientific method. I don't believe that we're causing runaway climate change for similar reasons to not believing in homeopathy: the evidence for it just isn't there, no matter how passionately it's believed in by some. In addition to that, it's not at all clear to me that the consequences, even if we did significantly warm the planet, would be all negative.
You may have much lower standards for accepting scientific theories as truth, but you should at least recognize it when you do so.