An interesting post over at Choice Cuts discussing some tax-funded eco-scientists; they're claiming that if over the next ten years global temperatures go down, stay the same, or go up, it will definitely be global warming to blame.
So, Sir Karl Popper, God rest your Austrian soul, I hereby challenge you to falsify your way out of that one. Good luck!
UPDATE: I have added the following section to the Wikipedia page on falsifiability. I even tried, despite myself, to be even handed! Let's see how long the piece lasts in an un-shredded state before the eco-worshippers get themselves into a frothy lather about it (thus, of course, proving the point).
Both believers and deniers of global warming could also be accused of falling into a Popperian lack of falsifiability and the related Kuhnian trap of the locked paradigm (or in this case, two locked paradigms). In recent years, the theory of global warming caused by mankind has become extremely popular to the point where no matter what evidence is presented, whether on variations in the sun's energy output, or various other ice age volatility models caused by the circulation of the solar system through galactic dust clouds, it generally "proves" global warming caused by mankind to the believers, or "disproves" global warming caused by mankind to the deniers. For instance, to the majority camp of believers, the evidence generally points to global warming caused by mankind, whether the various bodies of factual evidence indicate global warming, global temperature stasis, or even global cooling; the minority denier camp use the exact same evidence to argue the opposite case. Unfortunately, science has become very emotively intertwined in this arena with politics and state funding of science, as well as a whole range politically correct or politically incorrect orthodoxies, both for the global warming believers and the global warming deniers. This whole area may take several decades to unravel with independent Popperian-minded scientists using a falsification-based approach to get to the truth of the matter (or at least, to the least false conclusion).