A component of the Global Warming debate is that to admit we are part of the problem is that we need to be part of the solution, myself included. We find it inconceivable that we may need to alter our lifestyle or sacrifice what we enjoy. Another component is a basic distrust of science which has grown since 1980 as politics, on both sides, has intruded and steered the debate away from facts toward political philosophy.
My last contribution to this discussion (in the spirit of Dr. Dirt's previous post) will simply be some additional resources addressing some points made by others. Gut feeling says no one is going to change their minds in this thread.
I have to admit, it may be fatigue from hearing about it all the time, but I'm starting to believe that humans have very little to do with global warming.
My wife and I watched "An Inconvenient Truth" last Sunday and when they put up the graphs with the temperatures and CO2 levels going back 650,000 years, then refocused on the last little bit, which was the past 100 years, it really struck me as odd. Here they've got a *really* obvious pattern, and we happen to be at the peak of one of the hills on the graph, which corresponds with the high temperatures/CO2 levels we've been experiencing in this period.
Also, when they showed the Keeling Curve, which showed CO2 levels rising and rising from its starting point (1954?) despite any kind of ecological initiatives that were put in place. Mr. Gore seemed so happy when he pointed out the spot where they Kyoto treaty went into effect, which showed a smaller difference between the high and low levels of CO2 in the atmosphere, but still kept increasing year after year.
They pointed out that this was the first time that CO2 levels were above 300ppm, and I'd believe that however much above the previous maximum is being caused by humans, but not the entirety of it.
Edit: This is why I rarely post, most of my points have been made.
(edited by Zundian on 16.11.07 1927) "Tattoos are the mullets of the aughts." - Mike Naimark
The hardest part of discussing Global Warming is that there is almost no documentation of weather patterns prior to the advent of the Industrial Revolution. It isn't like we can look back and completely say that all the weather trends we are experiencing now are as a direct result of it, or if it's just the way the planet's climates behave sometimes, like in the Dark Ages, Ancient Rome, or even Ancient Egypt.
Either way, I don't strive to 'be green' because I'm in favor, one way or the other. I do it because my girlfriend is, and I'm far more interested in appeasing the provider of my nookie than saving the planet.
Hold nothing sacred and you'll never be dissapointed. Especially not this statement.
So's Bush. The only difference is that Peroutka is even *more* of a Bible thumping reactionary lunatic. He's so nuts it's hard to believe Pat Robertson isn't backing him. I love that he supports abolishing the Department of Education.