Climate change guff is not over yet.

We have seen some rather welcome developments on the AGW front this week.

First off, schools are going to stop teaching climate change as part of the national curriculum.

Head of government review says school syllabus needs to 'get back to the science in science'

There is no real science left in the climate change debate any longer. Teaching schoolchildren about human caused global warming has become little more than a political crusade which has no place in the classroom.

The second piece of interesting news goes to the cause of climate change:

Earth may be headed into a mini Ice Age within a decade

A mini ice age? How could that be?

What may be the science story of the century is breaking this evening, as heavyweight US solar physicists announce that the Sun appears to be headed into a lengthy spell of low activity, which could mean that the Earth – far from facing a global warming problem – is actually headed into a mini Ice Age.

It's all down to sunspots, or in this case, lack of them which may now put the earth onto a cooling trend.

So just as the validity of AGW on the national curriculum is out into question, American scientists discover that global warming may be about to reverse.

Reasons to be cheerful? Not yet.

First the domestic issue. The AGW agenda and the left wing ideology is very much ingrained into our current education system. It will take a lot more than a coalition ministers recommendation to make even a small dent in it.

They couldn't even get us weekly bin collections. The councils fought that one tooth and nail and got a u-turn on the basis that they have strict EU recycling quotas to meet.

How are the government ever going to remove the teaching of climate change from schools when Gordon Brown signed a bill to reduce carbon emissions by 80% by 2050, and coalition MPs are actually considering energy rationing in order to meet this target.

Not a chance. We have seen how hollow words from the current crop of MPs, quickly get brushed under the carpet as soon as there is a bit of opposition from the public sector.

And the sunspots? Oh, the green lobby will soon do away with that argument, they've done it before.

Early records of sunspots indicate that the Sun went through a period of inactivity in the late 17th century. Very few sunspots were seen on the Sun from about 1645 to 1715. This period of solar inactivity also corresponds to a climatic period called the "Little Ice Age" when rivers that are normally ice-free froze and snow fields remained year-round at lower altitudes. There is evidence that the Sun has had similar periods of inactivity in the more distant past.

The Maunder Minimum and the Little Ice Age. If these were viable arguments in the eyes of the green lobby, the debate would be over already. But they're not.

This little nugget about the earth starting to cool due to sunspots will soon by rubbished by the AGW community in a way that will convince those who 'want to beleive'.

Hell, I'm a card carrying AGW denier but I'm not even sure if I am convinced by this new argument yet. Not after reading this:

National Solar Observatory, NASA say no “Maunder Minimum” — sorry, deniers — Solar Cycle 24 poised to rev up

The sunspot cycle is about to come out of its depression, if a newly discovered mechanism for predicting solar cycles — a migrating jet stream deep inside the sun — proves accurate. And that will add a small amount of warming in the next few years, which were already predicted to be record-setting by two recent studies.

This was written almost two years ago to the day by the same people who have just given us,

The Sun normally follows an 11-year cycle of activity. The current cycle, Cycle 24, is now supposed to be ramping up towards maximum strength. Increased numbers of sunspots and other indications ought to be happening: but in fact results so far are most disappointing. Scientists at the NSO now suspect, based on data showing decades-long trends leading to this point, that Cycle 25 may not happen at all.

If I can question this data (and my mind is made up that AGW does not exist) then the green lobby will make mince of it. They will successfully deny this just as they have every other bit of science that puts doubt on their beliefs.

The best I can imagine is a grudging admission that the sun has a small effect on temperature, and then a statement to the effect that without the decrease in solar activity, man made global warming would be much more severe. The sun is merely giving us respite from our folly and when solar activity resumes we are all up the frozen creek.

The edifice might be showing some cracks but the climate change crumble is still along way off.