| I will bet a bunch of golden stars that Beavoid has just read "State of Fear" by Micheal Chrichton. It's a peice of propoganda. The only reason I don't totally condemn it is is that it made some decent points.
I am not willing to discard the notion of global warming (that would be very unscientific), but I doubt that it is nearly as problematic or controllable as many people say it is.
The problem with global warming is that it is a political issue. As is the sad truth, science and politics mix terribly. The result is that you can't know who to trust. Everyone is polarized and biased.
The raw temparature data is very inconclusive on face. The only way to get a trend is to norm it against all kinds of factors. Depending on who massages the data, you can find any trend you want.
Aside from the ambiguous nature of the actual worldwide tempurature fluctuations, there is the question of causality. We theorize that it is CO2. It is a good theory, but I don't totally buy it with the current evidance. We know from geological records that tempuratures fluctuate wildly on this planet. We do not yet understand our unimaginable complex weather systems to make a definitive causal statement.
Wheather or not global warming due to CO2 is true, we should cut emissions anyway. Acid rain, oil wars, and high oil prices are reasons enough.
Fixed ideas are like a cramp in the foot - the best remedy against it is to tread on it.
-Søren Kierkegaard |