Hang on.... the opposition reject statistics when they feel like it- only to use them in their favour, when they feel fit.
More attacks with name calling certainly doesn't help either.
1) I am not talking about statistics, I am talking about data that clearly falsifies James Hansen's et. al's predictions.
2) As for name calling, any "scientists" who refuse to release the RAW data they use to come to their gloom and doom predictions, along with openly sharing all their methods used to reduce or otherwise "smooth" that data are not following the scientific method nor acting in the best interests of the people of earth.
3) Climategate I and II. Need I say more? The evidence of scientists behaving badly that these events revealed should give anyone pause as to their claims and political activism.
The truth is neither you or I have the answer to whether this is DEFINITELY a problem or not.
So, why not err on the side of caution?
Becuase the gimmicks prescribed by the politicians in cahoots with scientists they pay with public funds will cost our economy DEARLY...and just at a time when global economies CAN NOT afford it.
Oh, perhaps if we ignore it- it will go away. I get the feeling that this is viewed from a political angle in preference to a view from a position of caution and common sense.
Let us be brutally honest here: The entire AGW scam is nothing more than a political movement. How else could you defend against this when its biggest, continuous gloom and doom proponent is a politician (none other than Al Gore). Add to that the way that the IPCC takes science (and in some cases not even science, but activist environmental articles which are NOT peer reviewed) and turn them into a "summary for policymakers" which is blatantly politcal and recommends exactly the things that politicians like Al Gore want to hear? Let us not also forget that Al Gore and MANY politicians got into the business of "carbon credit trading" well before his Inconvenient Truth movie came out. Does that not smell of CONFLICT OF INTEREST to you? Does to me.
I have no leanings towards the loony lefties. But, I do care about the place I live in- this is the only one I have!
As do I, Dave. I have a 3300W solar PV system on my roof here in SoCal that generates more power than I use on an annual basis. Moreover, in the coming weeks I will be installing an 800W wind turbine power system on the ranch I am building in SW Colorado. That entire complex in Colorado will remain OFF GRID as long as I can keep it that way. So I am clearly doing my part and challenge anyone to do even as much as I have done.
My point in relating all this is that it takes INDIVIDUAL actions, and that is how these things SHOULD be handled. When GOV decides to get in this kind of business, we open the door to not just some corruption, not just a lot of corruption, but MASSIVE corruption that will likely NOT achieve the goals of improving how we tend to our planet and how we generate energy, but rather will make one groups of people poorer (or put some energy companies out of business) while making another group of people (politicians) richer...on the backs of the people they claim to wish to protect.
Sorry, AGW is so laced with politics that I cannot do anything but fight it with all my might. But as you can see from the above, I walk the talk of alternative energy and minimizing my impact on the planet. That is how I choose to roll.
RMT