Originally Posted by Sam

The overwhelming consensus of the scientific community (i.e., those who are actively engaged in climate research, publish their results in peer-reviewed journals, and allow their conclusions to be tested by others) is that the global warming that is happening is mostly human-caused by the burning of fossil fuels. There is disconnect between the scientists and the uneducated general public. The political media is usually interested in fanning the flames of controversy instead of educating the public. Therefore, they will look for opponents of the scientific consensus to provide a "balanced view" and give equal credence to the global warming skeptics( see above lin of the lack of credibility on these "scientists" geez I could have been one of them! The voices of the few (unqualified) are magnified to be equal to the voices of the many. Sad huh?

Originally Posted by cedenot

Ok, I'm as skeptical of global warming as anyone, especially man made. I can only think of one thing that could change my mind, debate. If Al Gore could kick Ross Perots ass in a NAFTA debate on Larry King, then why couldn't he do the same against some pointy head on global warming? I am a tv news junky from all sources. I have never witnessed a pro vs con debate on the subject. Why is this?

Also, why is every single solution for man made global warming a plank in the democratic platform? Why are all of the ramifications of warming negative? Are there no positives?

The biggest question of all, who is making the money on this issue? Always follow the money.

Originally Posted by A. Crowley

Too funny!

Another unread article offered-up by Cletus and Jethro.

This time Wiki...which they had always dissed before.

Republicans are as mental midgets.