The word conservative in the political arena has become an oxymoron beyond dimension. These people cannot be described as conserving anything other than their own right to materialistically and rapaciously exploit for personal gain. The very real consequences of anthropogenic climate forcing are with us now, and unless we all become conservative in the sense of conserving energy and coming together to defeat the oil industry we will all become impoverished, including those who “think” they can deny their way to more wealth and power. The poor have traditionally relied on the subsidy that nature has provided for survival, clean air, fresh water, fuel for cooking, and the autumn harvest. Commoditization of these subsidies for profit and exploitation has made the few extremely wealthy at the expense of the many.

A recent study provides quantitative evidence that wealthy nations benefit at the expense of poorer nations through exploitation of “ecosystem services”. If the real contribution to utility is accounted for by “ecosystem services” the apparent prosperity of wealthy nations drops precipitously. Accepting the truth of anthropogenic climate change implies the truth of a contribution of “ecosystem services” to the capital equation. “Current economic models undervalue this provision, because many ecosystem services are ‘public goods’, historically provided for free. (NATURE|Vol 451|28 February 2008 pp 1067-1068). This would explain the resistance to accepting anthropogenic climate change because it means that clean air, healthy oceans, rain forests, fresh water, in essence all the basis of “ecosystem services” are fungible and are not provided free as natures’ subsidy to those few who become wealthy by their exploitation.

The notion that we cannot replace fossil fuel based energy with energy from the sun and hydrogen in water is soundly based in ignorance, collusion, misinformation and political corruption. It is the unfortunate truth that we have past the “tipping” point and unless we begin to use the available technologies to make oil irerelevent and advance to a cleaner, energy efficient (and abundant) non fossil fuel economy, we will suffer the very real consequences of abiding by the will of these so called conservative “leaders”.

Max Planck said,

"A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it."

James Watt, the first Secretary of the Interior in the Reagan administration, testified before the U.S. Congress that protecting natural resources was unimportant in light of the imminent return of Jesus Christ. "God gave us these things to use. After the last tree is felled, Christ will come back," Watt said.1 http://www.cennz.org/SPattemore1.pdf

never a better arguement for the separation of the secular from the religious in government. "Two kooks from jihad" whether it be the middle east or the middle west or Washington DC.

maxwell repeatedly claims that non linear systems such as climate cannot be predicted by simplistic models such as the one proposing anthropogenic climate forcing. I agree. We should not throw dust into the atmosphere, fertilize the ocean to produce huge algae blooms, and conduct other "experiments" of amelioration which have unpredictable tertiary effects. Unfortunately, the genie of fossil fuel combustion, which has unpredictable tertiary effects of its own continues unabated. We were not nearly so cautious and politically impotent when it comes to exploiting this resource. We never evaluated the benefits of burning fossil fuels rather than harvesting the hydrogen and using the carbon for carbon reinforced materials. We never considered the non linear consequences of unbridled economic growth. We only saw the hedonistic benefits of profligate wanton expansion.

Huge quantities of solar photonic energy beams directly to the earth daily. The quantity of energy contained in water split by electrolysis and burned as hydrogen circumvents the disastrous effect of perturbing the carbon cycle, with it's concommitant tertiary effects. There can be no denying anthropogenic effects on the environment, from deforestation, 90% reduction in carbon biomass from the oceans, pollution in the air... the list goes on. There are clearly patterns which are discernible within the non linearity. The frequency of chaotic periods is increasing over time. That should tell you something in itself. You want to use language to confuse the layman from seeing what common sense makes obvious, go ahead, you serve only your ego and sense of superiority, not the common good.

The failure to make the transition from a fossil fuel economy will most definitely hand down poverty to us all. We are being held hostage, fed lies, and stretched thin to the breaking point by the forces of big oil. The benefits of change far outweigh the perils of not changing. Global climate change is irrelevent when one considers peak oil. (Please just look it up.)

As far as the history of ice ages and climate warming, we could wait for a catastrophic volcanic event which will cool the planet and bring on an ice age, if we don't bring ecological imbalances under control, some natural force will do it for us. The earth will remain, the question is do we want to force the destruction of a temperate and habitable planet through failing to make timely and necessary changes. Even if we make the changes, there are no guarantees, catastrophic changes may take us out anyway. I would rather say we try to live in a more balanced way with the planets ecosystem, rather than arrogantly and hubristically plundering without regard. Most assuredly, we will not be the last species to be made extinct.