Please, we cannot look weak here. We must begin the Inquisition and soon. Our Messiah says that we have less than ten years to save Gaia, Mother of All, True Center of the Univers. Do you guys have uniforms, yet?

If can you can show us that you have the slightest idea what you're talking about when it comes to climate change, we'll take you seriously here, believe it or not. We won't cut your mike like Faux News.

Of course, this will mean that you'll have to actually engage real people, not two dimensional talking heads, and you'll be exposed to facts that aren't masticated and spoon fed through the right-wing, boob-tube industrial complex. I know its scary to go outside the mothership. And your Karl Rove talking points won't help you here. But you can do it.

   Ummm, Greenie made me laugh!!  That was funny!!  A joke, right??  A nice one.. Thanks!

patrick

David,
     I have to say I think you handled this poorly.  You shouldn't have had to eat any crow.  Your response should have been across the lines of "The eternally indignant right-wing nuts once again show their penchant for attacking staw-men.  I only said there should be something LIKE Nuremberg, i.e., an international tribunal investigation wrong doing.  Secondly, I never attacked global warming skeptics, I only attacked professional obfuscators and deniers.  It's time for the right-wing to pick up a copy of "Critical Thinking for Dummies" and look up attacking a straw-man.  However, this gives me an oppurtunity to flesh out my analogy and say in what ways I don't think an international investigation would be like Nuremberg..."  Just me 2 cents.

Many believe earth is heading for another very nasty ICE AGE. An Ice Age that will kill far more than a Global Warming age will. Cold is a far deadlier killer. If an "Ice Age" does roll in, let's not bother to bring to trial those who kept us from getting ready for shorter growing seasons, lots and lots of snow, cold, damp weather, food shortages, heating fuel delivery problems, mega deaths from starvation and illness. When food becomes scarce and heating hard to come by, take the food and heating fuel from the "Global Warming" crowd! Let them freeze and starve to death!  When people have to find shelter in warmer areas, take the homes of those who push "Global Warming" that live in those nice warm areas - no matter what their rank. When food delivery can only be made to some, none to the Global Warming screamers - they will have their Global Warmth to keep them from freezing to death. The globe has been warmer. Iceland has been losing ice since the late 1800's. The "Little Ice Age" ended around 1800 A.D. It was so cold before then that London fairs were held on the frozen Thames up to 1780. The U.S. Continental Army almost froze to death from the cold while at Valley Forge. The Black Death, the Irish Potato Famine, famine around the globe which ushered give rise to Islam can be traced to the colder and damper weather that accompanied the "Little Ice Age". The earth has been warming since the "Little Ice Age ended around 1800 when there were no SUVs, big factories, trains, cars, planes, billions of people on the earth. In fact, same holds for the end of the last big Ice Age that ended some 10,000 years ago and all the other ICE AGES before that. Details the "Chicken Little's" keep ignoring. People like Gore and his "Global Warming terrorists" in earlier times have burned witches alive, imprisoned Galileo, burned books in NAZI Germany, killed Kulaks in Russia. There is an evil and the evil is ignorance and fear of debate. The Global Warming Alarmists are simply the same type who pushed Lysenkoism.  These types are simply the current flavor of a part of humanity that has plagued mankind from day one. They are the bane of humanity. They are the "evil ones" who hold humanity down and load mankind with fear and hate of change. . They are the "Witch Doctors" who sow fear and hate to achieve and hold power. They are the new practitioners of ignorance and intolerance. A trial by Global Warming Terrorist I won't be a Nuremburg Trial, it will be a Witch Trial! And, and, and, they are, as always, WRONG!

What is it with you and the IPCC scenarios?

The climate change science continues to improve, even while complexities mean an infinite amount of research is possible.  The question is when do we make a POLITICAL decision to act, in the face of the evolving science.  For many, that point was passed a long time ago, when governments around the world signed the climate change treaty that later led to the Kyoto Protocol.  The US has not ratified Kyoto, but continues to recognize obligations under the climate change treaty.

You might disagree that the problem is serious enough to merit any political action at all - although I see you actively favor government subsidies for fusion research - but it is still a political decision that our society has a right to make regardless of the existing science.  

What is an undeniable truth is that presently there are no clear or enforceable property rights relating to the global atmosphere, so all GHG emitters (in cluntries that have no Kyoto obligations) are allowed to do so to an unlimited degree without cost.  A related undeniable truth is that commercial interests that make heavy use of the atmosphere as a GHG dump (either as producers of coal or pettroleum or heavy users of such fossil fuels) have been undertaking deliberate PR campaigns designed to allow them to continue to use the atmosphere for free as a GHG dumping ground, by frustrating any domestic GHG regulatory action that would impose costs on GHG emissions.

Please let me know if you disagree with either of these two points.

Your flogging of the scenarios does not challenge climate change science, but simply goes to the question as to when policy makers have been sufficiently informed to make a decision to act.  In my view, that time was long ago, way before the IPCC TAR projections.  Are you trying to take the policy decision out of the arena of politics and make it purely a scientific one?

Regards,

Tom

First, while you make it clearer whom you're aiming at (those who are mouthpieces for commercial interests trying to stop effective GHG emission regulations), that doesn't really happen until below the fold.  It's perfectly fine to hit hard at these types, but you should clarify the debate.  There are far too many who are misreading you to think that your ire is directed at everyone, including scientists and laymen alike, and not a very special group that is deliberately manipulating debate for their own commercial, financial or political interests.

Second, why not ALSO aim at people who are simply in cognitive denial, and who dismiss all discussion of climae change because it comes from left-wing nutjobs?  So much of the culpability of the first group comes from the fact that for the average citizen it is difficult to understand the science and we can be easily led astray by the rhetoric of the commercial interests.