I am suspicious of any computer model that pretends that it can forecast how things are going to be in 10 years, 20 years, 50 years, 100 years, if it can't be "taken back in time", do the forecasts and get to where we are now. From everything I've heard, there are no computer models for man made climate change that actually work.
I think that people forget about the effect of the sun and el nino and la nina. And people confuse weather with climate.
I'm in Kansas. I know that I can go to some cuts in the road by my house and find shark teeth. We made fences, houses, churches, barns, almost everything back in the day out of limestone posts. Limestone forms under water. So, there was ocean over at least half of this country at some point in the past. It used to be warmer. It used to be cooler. That is the cyclical nature of climate. The great plains used to be called the Great American Desert, but aren't now. The oceans in Kansas may have been millions of years ago, but I don't think that kills my argument. That just means that the earth has been changing for a really long time. There is no reason to believe that it changed for a long time and then all of a sudden at some point in the past it came into equilibrium and will never change again.
I think it very convenient that people who live very conspicuously, with private jets, humongoid houses, etc. assuage their guilt by buying "carbon credits". I actually looked into selling carbon credits. I have access to lots of land and if the carbon credits were worth anything, I was actually thinking about being a "broker" for them. Linking people with land to sequester carbon with people buying credits. But the "carbon credit" market is dropping faster than Mitzi's panties after prom. It just isn't worth anything. So, people can buy carbon credits for nothing and pretend to be concerned about the environment but only so long as someone else sacrifices. Like saying other people should take the bus so we don't have so much congestion on the roads.
I don't like the religious-like quality that global warming protaganists have. If it is right, it is right. Let the science decide. But don't try to squash the other point of view:
British Lord Stings Senators Rockefeller and Snowe: 'Uphold Free Speech or Resign'
I am hesitant to say this, because I am afraid it will be dismissed out of hand because he is a radio talk show host. But I listed to Glenn Beck when he had Lord Monkton on, the guy who convinced the English parliament to not allow Gore's movie in their schools, and I tell you, that guy sounds sharp. The transcript it here:
Glenn Beck - Interviews - Glenn Beck: Lord Monckton on Global Warming
I think it funny, actually, that the U.S. is being chastised for not signing the Kyoto treaty but no other industrialized country that signed it will be able to fulfill the agreement. At least we aren't breaking the treaty! If you know of one, please let me know. Seriously. I want to be fully informed, and if that is wrong, please tell me.
I want to know who is pushing this issue and more importantly, why. I doubt altruism is the main motivator at the highest level of this movement. It has to boil down to money, and we need to know who is making the money because of this and who stands to gain.
Now, that said, the things we, the hoi pelloi, are supposed to do to help this "disaster" are actually in line with what we all say to save money. Don't drive as much. Shut off your lights, turn down your heat, turn down your air conditioner, plant trees, etc. That is all fine. But when our government starts hinting, or just flat out saying, that they are going to increase taxes, put additional regulations on industries, outlaw other things because of this, we need to know the facts.
The Kansas Secretary of Health and Environment denied two coal power plants because of carbon dioxide. Now, the company that is wanting to put them in is fighting it, but they may just skip over the state line to Colorado or Oklahoma. So we are losing out on tax money and jobs the company would provide and giving that to those other states. And the gases that come out of those plants will still be blowing over our state.
Kansas rejection of coal plant fires up backlash | Environment | Reuters