In my opinion the debate is over and it has been for a long time. Exxon Mobil and other interest groups can attempt to muddy the waters and prolong the debate for as long as they want, but it is the politicians who really need to take the lead. I'm glad Tony Blair has come out and really brought this issue into serious political focus: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6096084.stm 

I have no intention to see 'An Inconvient Truth' not least because Al Gore bores the pants off me (I can see now why the American people didn't muster up the energy to challenge the verdict of US supreme court). I get the message and haven't the patience for an hour and a half lecture. But at least he is trying to make a difference, not like that other bunch of idiots in the White House.

actually the debate isn't over because there isn't enough imperical data to prove that climate change is based solely on human interaction.

We know teh world has gone through a number of climate changes that were not caused by humans, and yet now we act like all climate change is becaue of us. When in the 70s it was about an upcoming ice age, and then it was this upcoming heat wave, and now it's a mixture of both - the science keeps adapting to the data in order to try and prove that something is happening when in fact, there's just not enough evidence to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Don't get me wrong, humans have an impact on the climate and pollution. I question the science and the extent at which some scientists say it's as far as it is. There's plenty we can do to improve our climate and environment, but let's not run off the cliff thinking that current climate change is based solely on humans.

Last year when Katrina hit New Orleans and Missisippi, everyone used this as an example of climate change. The left suggested that if Bush jumped on to Kyoto, something like this wouldn't happen, etc, etc. And yet this year, not a single hurricane had any impact on US soil. We had one hit and it was a dud, and that was it. So since last year's excessive amount of hurricanes was a sign of global warming, would the lack of them suggest the opposite? If you use the same logic, then you have to assume so.

We've only been tracking weather patterns with current instruments for 50-100 years. With a world that is millions of years old, you can't take a small percentage of years and come up with conclusions. Over the past ten years, the average temperature is still less than whati t was 50 or so years ago.

Some scientists say that we are about to begin a natural climate cooling. We've been on the end of a natural hot spell and that has come to an end. We will see in a few more years.

But to suggest that the debate is no longer a debate, well, that's a reach.

Jordan .

To be fair the there are those on both sides of the argument that relish this left vs right struggle. I wouldn't take comfort in anything said by the way on events such as Katrina. Climate change touches on fundamental problems that move past all that. The point is there are fundamental problems with our patterns of consumption and how we discount future cost/benefits. Short-termism negatively affects our politics too. What rational leader wants to impose harsh policies now in order to secure long term economic viability when he/she is well out of office?

Of course the climate is not static. Uncertainty is a common feature of all global climatic models. But we still need to bravely address our relationship with the environment around us. The way we consume is unsustainable and will only accelerate economic meltdown. True, we have only been measuring the weather for only 50-100 years but that last 100 years has witnessed a period of exponential economic growth powered by non-renewable polluting energy. To wait for disaster to happen in order to settle the debate is foolish. No scientific theory can ever be proved to be 100% accurate so climate change should not be any different. Until a scientist credibly disproves the greenhouse effect theory I'm staying on this side of the argument.

Change needs to happen on all fronts, technological innovation, measured production, and mature consumption is the only way forward. In my opinion humans are becoming increasingly more fat, myopic, selfish and lazy. We can do alot better.  

What percentage is "some"? 

I don't know...I just know that I've heard a number of scientists say over the past year or so.

EDIT

Take a look at this.

"We observe a net loss of 3.2 (± 1.1) X 10**22 J of heat from the upper ocean between 2003 and 2005. Using a broad array of in situ ocean measurements, we present annual estimates of global upper-ocean heat content anomaly from 1993 through 2005. Including the recent downturn, the average warming rate for the entire 13-year period is 0.33 ± 0.23 W/m2 (per unit area of the Earth’s surface). A new estimate of sampling error in the heat content record suggests that both the recent and previous cooling events are significant and unlikely to be artifacts of inadequate ocean sampling.......The explanation of this temporal change in the radiative imbalance of the Earth’s climate system is a challenge to the climate science community. It does indicate that we know less about natural- and human-climate forcings and feedbacks than concluded in the IPCC Reports."

Jordan .

I've been tracking the rain for the past month or so with a website that narrows down an area by zip code and then lets you know the likelihood of rain.  Because my son is shooting a film in November, I was hoping this website would give a clue about which days would be best for shooting outdoors. 

Well, they were pretty accurate for Los Angeles through most of October when they called for sun-sun-sun-and more sun.  But the past four days, they had predicted 50% chance of rain, 65%, 25% and 65% again today.  Well, they've been off base.  It's been sun-sun-sun-sun.  If they don't have a great degree of accuracy over the short term -- say one month -- why should I fret about the long term.

Somehow I just can't get lathered up with gloom over longer range forecasts.  

Somehow I just think the earth will right itself.

Or not.

Either way, I just don't believe there's too much human beings can do about it.  I'm pretty Zen on the issue.

Of course I was one of those doubting Thomasinas who didn't buy an ounce of bottled water nor remove a dime from my bank in fear and dread over Y2K either. 

Susan 

     
“Half a truth is often a great lie.”

Ben Franklin

Quote - 'Either way, I just don't believe there's too much human beings can do about it. '

I couldn't disagree more.

I think an analogy may help convey what I'm trying to get at here. Say an overweight person dies of a heart attack. Is it caused by lack of exercise, eating habits, smoking maybe? Direct linkage between one thing and its cause is something that cannot be acheived 100% accurately all of the time. However it is pretty safe to say that his/her habits have brought forward his/her inevitable death. Does that mean we just throw our hands up and say ' Oh I'm gonna die anyway at some stage, why bother changing my lifestyle?' Is that a good example to set for their kids ?

You know, James, there are people (some close to me) who believe that the pull of the planets, the sun and the stars have an impact on the way our human lives are ordered.  They may point to the fact that the moon pulls the tide so why would we presume to be unaffected? 

You'll be pleased to know I've always been a non-smoker, I drink about one glass of wine a couple times a months, and have an active life style walking my dog several times a day.  Not to mention the exercise I get running up and down the shopping malls, flea markets and super market.  I see my variety of doctors and my dentist on a regular basis.  

But I really don't have any other plans to save the whole friggin' planet.  Mother Earth is going to have to do whatever she can with me on the sidelines.  Frankly, I'm not convinced.  Furthermore, I'm just not interested enough to delve any deeper.  If and when I become convinced, I'll...  I'll... uh, panic or something. 

Susan 

     
“Half a truth is often a great lie.”

Ben Franklin

It was a an analogy, I'm not talking about any one person's individual habits although collective bad habits obviously have have material effects. I'm talking about the bigger picture. And being flippant about important issues doesn't really add value to the debate; I suspect you would be the type of person who would get annoyed by apathetic attitudes towards politics, why should the environment and economics be any different?

Lets it is great that the particulate crap from cars and shokestakes have been muffled since 1970.That was a good sound project accomplished over time with a minimum of economic ox goring.

 I think the humans and their greenhouse effect is a ( to me) relatively minor deal compared to the possibility of a couple sun blocking volcanoes next year, one of those hard to predict earth "wobbles" or the powers that have modified the temperature and climate for millenia. What happened to the front page dire doom warnings from NEWSWEEK and TIME in the 1970's calling for a deadly global cooling. When a concept " The inconvenient TRUTH" has that truth word in it--step back, relax. We have enough problems that we the humans can do something about. Lets do that and leave the solar system and universal powers with some respect. We don't have to look that deep for problems based on conflicting science. Nothing wrong with sensible alternate energy sources and conservation by the way, but let's do it without doomsday fears and quickly designed well meaning legislation that could well be suspect and ill advised.

Now , watch out ! An asteroid the size of England will probably hit us soon and that will be it. Nah, not really. Wanna bet we are still here in a livable climate in 8 years despite Al Gore's TRUTH ?

Just a side point on the Kyota Accords. They were to be very ineffectual. China, India, in fact all the up and coming gas makers were not envolved. I think it would have caused relatively immediate economy problems in Europe and the U S . ( I know you are an accountant with an interest in economics) Economics is a tough nut to figure out and get things right. The environment is much more difficult to figure. For one thing even more variables beyond our control.

I can't answer that any more than to say what I've already said, James. I'm not worried about it and I'm just not convinced of any urgency. I've listened to the debate for the past several years -- not with avid interest, I confess -- but I've given it a little attention. My instincts tell me that it's a panic driven issue. Now I certainly could be wrong but truth is I'm not about to become scientifically educated to the level I feel would be required to make an educated assessment. Since there are educated parties who express opposite points of view, I'll just sit back and let them duke it out. Maybe at the end of the day they can convince China and India to play along too.

No, I'm not so annoyed by the politically apathetic, actually. In fact, I rather wish we could return to an era with fewer individuals thinking they've become geopoiitcal geniuses since they started hating Bush. And I don't think I'm alone in saying that zealotry is far more annoying than apathy.

I remember when I first moved to Laguna Beach, California in 1970. It was a funny little beach town populated with artists (the kind who paint seascapes mostly), Hare Krishna culties, Jesus freaks one of whom regularly walked up and down Pacific Coast Hwy carrying a full-size crucifixion ready wooden cross, surfers, hippies, a large gay population and other new agey vegetarians, vegans and macrobiotic types. Once a year they have an arts and crafts festival. At the time I was selling macrame jewelry I had designed at this festival. Not wanting to leave my booth to go outside the grounds for lunch, I bought a hot dog at the food kiosk. While sitting there chomping on my hot dog, a couple came by and started to lecture me about the ingredients in a hot dog and was I aware of what I was eating. Annoying.

Same as I'd feel should I cross paths with that annoying Laurie Private Jet David, poor Larry David's zealot wife. She has a regular ritual where she screams at SUV drivers and leaves insulting notes attached to driverless SUVs in parking lots. Cut me some slack, Laurie! Give me a dullard rather than a missionary anyday.

But right you are suggesting I'm not adding much value to the debate. I don't even feel qualified to do any more than Google those who have an opposite view from Al Gore's and then so what?  Pick your expert, right?  So with that, I may just sit out the rest of this lively debate.

 Hey Erwin, what kind of jammies do you wear?  My favorites have black labs all over them.  Flannel, natch!

Susan

     
“Half a truth is often a great lie.”

Ben Franklin

lol the right has successfully nullified the debate. Well, if you can't beat 'em join 'em...my jammies are just plain blue

*sniff* 

Well, James, if it's any consolation, when you're holed up in your Global Warming backyard shelter cool as a cuke in your blue jammies, you may have the last laugh at the rest of us throwing off our comforters and sweltering in our sticky beds. 

Call you Cassandra, right?

Susan 

     
“Half a truth is often a great lie.”

Ben Franklin

Interesting article.Thanks.I do like the way the author connects environment, economy and politics-all knit together. But that graph really shows that China, India, Brail and the former Soviet Union (the so called  BRIC) are more than 3 times the potential problem of the whole developed world! ( EU does look responsible, or really not very responsible,on that graph projection, I have to say.) Without BRIC compliance I am afraid we would just be whistling in the greenhouse wind. ( I am accepting the greenhouse effect as very important here for sake of argument.)

Anyway, I read there will be no seafood by 2048 so we are doomed six ways from Sunday... Just a thought, so bear with me, is there an actual Doom industry going on -profiting from end of world prognostication publications and using up energy and paper all the while? Half serious.

Thanks for ruining my planned New Year's Eve 2047 lobster dinner, Raymond! Now it's looking like Peking Duck.

Susan

     
“Half a truth is often a great lie.”

Ben Franklin

that's only if we don't have "duck flu" by 2048.

Jordan .

In which case we'll just stick with the tried and true -- Good old Mad Cow filet mignon!  Maybe some e-coli brussell sprouts on the side?  Or Trans-Fat Freedom Fries.

Should the world still be around, and Southern California not burnt to a crisp or afloat in the Pacific after the next "Big One," I'll make my definitive plans then.

Rush Limbaugh made an amusing point today.  All the environmental movements warn of one catastrophic event after another.  At least James is able to look on the bright side with Ireland becoming a balmy future resort destination! Come on now!  Let's ACCENTUATE the POSITIVE a little bit!

Susan 

     
“Half a truth is often a great lie.”

Ben Franklin

Here is an article disputing the doom of global warming reports. From the good ole UK,

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/11/05/nosplit/nwarm05.xml

"We cannot allow a mine shaft gap"

Thats the point I was trying to get at Danwhy, its not so much the probable outcomes of bad habits, but more the bad habits themselves. Its a cop out and a neat side-step of the argument to say well sh*t is gonna happen anyway, why worry?

Nice going, Danwhy!  Just after we had talked Jamie down, now look what you've done!

You think you've got trouble in Calgary and Ireland, you should try a hot flash in the San Fernando Valley!  But do I panic?  Huh?  Do I worry?  NO!  Sooner or later all those unconcerned Chinese and Indians and Russians will get their trip together and not be so environmentally hazardous.   If not, maybe the whole world is Haiti. 

Susan

     
“Half a truth is often a great lie.”

Ben Franklin