Then I'm lost as to what your argument is. Part of it seems to be a simple rant against the brainwashing of the masses (implicitly at the behest of some shadowy ruling elite), which I won't dignify with a response. The other part seems to be a complaint that people believe what they're told without thinking to question it. What exactly do you want to do about it?
You have to remember that 99.99% of 'out there' theories (by which I assume you mean hypotheses) are crackpot rubbish. You complain that a paper is not published because it doesn't meet the approval of the peers. But that is one of the fundamental bases of science. Peer review is not a cabal against new ideas. It is a necessary safeguard aimed at simultaneously encouraging and hoping for new concepts, and also ensuring that these new concepts are at least consistent with what is already known. Contrary to the common beliefs of non-scientists and those scientists with an axe to grind, real science is agog for the presentation of new ideas. We know that there is much that is unknown. Please, please, show us how to understand better. But at the same time, don't waste our time with perpetual motion machines.
Not necessarily. It depends on where the CO2 comes from, and what happens to the waste products of the crop (ie those parts of it which we don't eat). It might even be beneficial to force food crops using enhanced CO2 levels, if the total amount of carbon in circulation is thereby reduced.
Y'all denialists/cranks/trolls who claim one local cold spell undermines AGW should be holidaying in Greenland where it is remarkably mild (and green) at the moment.
(Remember, y'all, that Greenland is that bit at the tip of the world where the ice is melting and the lawns need mowing) 
Varme i Grønland
BTW: Just for contrast itwas -7.5C (18F) at midday here in Denmark, y'all.
A lot of (all?) materials are dangerous in the right quantities! Water for example.
Your second point...depends on where the CO2 comes from! Clearly if it is generated specially for crop growth, then that's not a clever idea. However, get it as a waste product from another process...Guess which one?
The answer would depend on how hungry I was 
You're really quite rude and insulting and there's no need for it. I am well aware the much warmer temperatures at higher latitudes relates to arctic oscillation. Have some respect for other forum members who have just as much right as you do to make comments on a subject that is anything but a done deal.
I'm sensing things are starting to get personal. Please, lets keep it civil.
if global warming is real why is it as cold as the south pole in england and why has we got so much bloody snow lol! 
Two points:
1. It isn't.
2. Respectively suggest you read, learn, then post!
You're kidding, right?
There are 150 posts in this thread.Have you read any?