Don't know what I can tell you, link works for me. It takes a few seconds to load. Maybe you'll have better luck accessing from here?
http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/wg1-report.html
Section 2.
The AGW denier claim re:climate, is that climate is chaotic and inherently unpredictable. My claim, is THAT claim is confusing 'weather' and 'climate'. Climate is not chaotic, and IS much more easily predictable than weather. The fact that a time-averaged chaotic system is a non-chaotic system (on a similar time scale) is not something I'm able to explain on this forum. Any advanced PDE book will detail for you. On a simpler level, a sophmore thermo text will explain how when you add (via global radiative forcing in this case) energy to a system, the temperature of that system will rise. It really IS that simple. Add energy, temp goes up. I'm saying nothing about predicting LOCAL climate shifts. I don't know how hard that is.
And it WAS predicted 'long ago'. Like I wrote earlier, Carl Sagan, at least as far back as Cosmos, talks about it.
What else...? ah, right. No, GW isn't bad or good or anything. It's the expensive effect on infrastructure that is bad. If I thought that it would be cheaper to deal with rapid AGW than to try and slow it down, I'd advocate that.