I've heard Duke46's assertion in many different forms: the reason that people want to tackle global warming is because this is an opportunity to create a one world government.

Thank god we are on to their game! This whole scientific edifice has an alternate purpose! The effort to reduce acid rain and eliminate CFC's etc didn't result in one world government; so here is yet another attempt that we have fortunately uncovered. A trojan horse...

How could regulation of a GAS possibly result in a world government? There are so many ways for the market to handle this problem that any modestly informed person could list 5 and be pretty close to what expert economists consider the most efficient. I imagine the federal regulations to address this problem might be 1 or 2 pages at most. In fact, a well crafted proposal that transferred taxation from the good (income) to the bad (waste products) could eliminate 1 million pages of IRS regulations at the same time. With no threat of world government in sight!

Yawn. Another discussion on global warming and, as usual, there are a few people that want to discuss the science.

There aren't scientists here. There are conferences, papers, and peer reviewed journals where the science can be discussed, is discussed, is vetted, and rises or falls on its merits, data, proof, and proof of the contrary. We aren't going to duplicate the deliberation and review of the Geophysical Union on the letters page of Salon.

So why do the deniers keep trying to use these types of fora to achieve that goal? Could it be because their denials wouldn't make it in the scientific world? Is it the same media trick that the intelligent design gang uses? It has the same topography: select a few scientific sounding items to present to the public, and, despite those items being disproven by scientists, continue to present those items to the public to generate doubt. The protestations of the deniers on non-scientific boards sounds exactly the same.

And, for those deniers who think they are heretics tackling the established scientific view, you aren't - the gentleman in the 50's who posited the possibility and swayed others to his view with data was the heretic.

I appreciate all the concern about carbon dioxide generation in transport, but for the average American, only one third of the energy a family uses is in transport. 1/3 is in space conditioning, and 1/3 is in other appliances and lighting.

Homes are such an easy target that it is sad higher energy efficiency standards were not adopted long ago. A 50% decrease in home energy use is easy, and is almost a cost wash between increased mortgage cost and energy savings per month. For the cost of going from granite to corian in the kitchen, or cutting one stall from the garage of a new home, home energy use could be cut 70%. With 1.8 million homes/yr expected to be built over the next 10 years, and with 250,000 homes replaced per year, huge cuts in home energy use are possible in the next 30 years. And the homes will look identical to how they do today! If homeowners can accept some changes in appearance, even bigger savings are possible.

All the technology is there; the biggest obstacles are the will, and training workers to build higher performance homes.

Can you find someone somewhere to do something for some price? Yes. Does anyone need a baby planner? No. Of course they don't since people have had babies for thousands of years without them. Can rich people be duped into giving up some money to a fake need? Yes. It is amazing that the wealthy are wealthy considering how easily then can be tricked out of their money. The notion that anyone would need more than 10 hours and $300 to prepare for the arrival of a baby is ridiculous; my spouse and I had twins recently and all the equipment we needed for the first few months would have fit in a small box. We purchased a used four door car to transport all four of us home from the hospital the day before they could leave the hospital! I drove from the car dealer to the hospital directly. Our nursery is a spare bedroom that was also the guest room.

Don't sweat it folks. Use your brain to determine what is essential and do as little as possible to do the essentials. With babies the bare minimum is 99% of the maximum support and care possible. Expend energy on the last 1% as your time, energy, and money permits. There will be no material change in care delivered, or outcome of raising the child.