http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/feb/11/climate-change-misleading-claims
This article gives a very balanced view which highlights the problems of exaggeration and poor media reporting on the general appearance of the topic. It makes clear that AGW sceptics (like Prager and Bastardi) are wrong and, on the other hand, that the most dramatic of the doomsayers are saying things that the conservative consensus statements of climate science don't say. Of course, the science may be wrong but it could be wrong either way. Until we have run the experiment, nobody can be certain which way it will end up - planetary feedbacks could keep the temperature fairly stable or we may pass a tipping point, known or as yet unknown, whereby the greenhouse effect is amplified, in which case the doomsayers will probably be right. Release of the undersea and tundra methane deposits would be one such mechanism.
Nick Palmer
