A long and interesting article about the sceptics of Global Warming:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/23/AR2006052301305_pf.html
I'm not posting the entire thing - go and read it at the URL. The short
version of my response to the sceptics would be to point them at
realclimate.org - but I found the following two snippets from the
article fascinating, and not just in the context of the climate change
"debate", either. They're disturbing reflections of how polarised and
spin-oriented the whole notion of public discourse has become. Witness,
closer to home, just how much posturing there is on both sides of the
reservation issue.
Udhay ("at least Humphrey Appleby was *honestly* dishonest")
>But when you step into the realm of the
>skeptics, you find yourself on a parallel
>Earth.
>
>It is a planet where global warming isn't
>happening -- or, if it is happening, isn't
>happening because of human beings. Or, if it
>is happening because of human beings, isn't
>going to be a big problem. And, even if it is
>a big problem, we can't realistically do
>anything about it other than adapt.
===============================================
>LET US BE HONEST about the intellectual
>culture of America in general: It has become
>almost impossible to have an intelligent
>discussion about anything.
>
>Everything is a war now. This is the age of
>lethal verbal combat, where even scientific
>issues involving measurements and molecules
>are somehow supernaturally polarizing. The
>controversy about global warming resides all
>too perfectly at the collision point of
>environmentalism and free market capitalism.
>It's bound to be not only politicized but
>twisted, mangled and beaten senseless in the
>process.
