Uncl,
The world's temperature is continually changing and has been since the beginning of time. I don't think anyone will argue that GHG could be a contributing factor to global warming. We just don't have the evidence. If so, the question is to what degree and what is the trade off analysis (cost / benefit) for the actions that we would need to take to affect global warming.
One study I saw was that if we went back to the stone ages and stopped all GHG emissions, we are talking about at 0.1 degree impact. The unbiased trade off analysis hasn't been made, just people running around with all sorts of dooms day scenarios.
The real question is SHOW US THE DATA that supports the arguement. Make it available in raw format so we can have others reivew and have an open debate. If my memory serves me right, the so called unbiased scientists lost or maybe even destroyed the data. One has to ask Why and How did this happen. Especially when their manipulations were made public.
Why the smoking gun emails that show that scientists were unable to explain why the earth is actually cooling not heating as the models predicted. Then the guys have the nads to "trick" the data so the hypothesis that the world is warming was supported. Fabrication and deception at best, loss of total credibility at worse. Scientists fired and normal people now questioning everything.
Now the latest story that the world will be in a 30 year cooling period but then dramatically shift to a warming period that will alter the world as we know it. We can't predict the weather tomorrow, never mind 30 years out. Nuts!
There is another big flaw in this arguement. We must assume that the earth's atmosphere actually retains the GHG emissions and does not allow heat generated to escape. This is the primary theory that you must believe (heat relfected back at earth and thus temperature rise). This is a hypothesis as well and there is growing data and experts that beleive heat from GHG is not trapped, but radiates out. If this is the case, we do not have an issue.
The bottom line is the scientists must provide the data that supports the warming claims to the international community and see if the data supports their hypothesis. If not, we really are peeing into the wind. Let the skeptics run their analysis, let the rational middle see both sides and I'm sure if the data supports - action will follow.
Time to burn some gas!!!
I'm a little curious. If people really feel this way, why not lead and sell their boat and cars, unplug homne from the elec grid, shut off their heating system and eat uncooked foods and save the planet? Why? Because they think they are better than the rest of us and their so called rules don't apply th them. Hypocrits!