Ooooh, look at the pretty pictures... they need to do something to justify their budget. Without a long term data set (something far in excess of the few hundred years we have) what does it mean? The big problem is that they have Venus envy. :) It is the model for CO2 driven global warming, but it is apples and oranges and it is only speculative theory as to how this will relate to Earth. The Sun is and always will be the driving force of climate. The Earth and Venus are very different. Venus is on average 67,240,000 miles from the sun and has no moon, while the Earth with a moon has an elliptical orbit that averages 92,955,807 miles etc. The scientists claim that runaway CO2 turned Venus into a fiery hell, but what measurements have they from the past of Venus? In this paper ( http://www.skepticalscience.com/Venus-ru... ) and others it is clear that scientists don't even all agree on this. And, even those that support the "runaway greenhouse theory" admit that it takes a lot of heat and many other combined factors... I dare say that being closer to the fire will warm you. I am a heretic...

The press release is what they usually are.
From a quick read I would not call it irrational, there is much discussion on how
natural forces affect amounts, movements and concentrations of carbon dioxide.
I do not see the reverse which would be the description and quantification of how it changes temperature, except for the obviously politically inserted statement- " atmospheric carbon dioxide – the key driver of global warming ". An easy way to guarantee the next grant. They do mention sources and destinations of carbon dioxide but do not mention how the figure put out by the IPCC for the average time that carbon dioxide stays in the atmosphere is ten times greater than the figure found by all studies. This affects the climate models and is one reason why the predictions are so bad.
The key error is in assuming what has never been demonstrated by data, that for a doubling of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere global temperature increases by x degrees. x according to IPCC and acolytes is 3 to 6 degrees C, according to luke-warmers is less than one degree c, and, by a paper published by NASA (!) is slightly negative.
Conclusion- many government run and funded research entities have done excellent work, those days have gone.