How many people posting here actually know any scientists? The ones I know, the actual working scientists, have little doubt that "unnatural" causes are changing our climate. One of my friends is a career paleo-geophysist. He has spent his life studying core samples and other geological data and correlating the data to historic climate change. Like all good scientists, he hedges a bit but believes manmade factors are changing our world. Another friend, holder of a doctorate in Chemistry, has been part of the global scientific community that has taken on and solved the ozone depletion problem. She says, that unlike the ozone problem, you can't trace climate changes back to simple roots. Natural cyclical factors might be part of it but magnified by greenhouse gases, deforestation, population pressures and more.

Of course, not all scientists can agree on anything. However, these friends are highly educated, practical scientists who do hands-on work for the government. They are very concerned. They have suffered through the last eight years of "directed" science and their stories are horrible. Let's hope Government can get its head out of the hole and start a true discourse on climate issues.

The best hospitals are located in urban centers... the best educational facilities.. the cleanest available fuels... the best sanitation and plumbing, too. Where did foot-and-mouth and mad cow start? Just last night, as I was ignoring the New Year's festivities outside and instead rotting my mind with cable television, I was watching rural Peruvian children play in fields of their own shit, their lungs clogged with particulate from wood-burning stoves. Do a little more digging, and the honest life reveals toxics from mountaintop mining facilities leached into the water supply. Up there, in rare air.

There's Alaska, the Frontier State, but... we've talked enough about Alaska.

Cities can be green. How can they not have the capacity to be? It's not a question, it's a necessity. Cities are a fact of life, and at the rate our breeding is proceeding, city is not turning into country--country is turning into city.

I read a book called Collapse by Jared Diamond (of Guns, Germs & Steel fame), and given our circumstances, it appears that we're not any smarter or dumber than our predecessors were in their circumstances.

Notice how no one dies from smallpox, influenza, or black plague these days. They die of other things. In Tanzania, due to the lack of big-game animals and spreading pockets of humans, the dwindling population of lions has begun to view humans as easy prey. They no longer need to go after the horned things on four legs that run really fast.

I love the countryside, too... it is endangered and will be until humans die out or devolve into a less-threatening species. We're still animals, competing with other animals for The Earth's resources.

I believe it's the Navajo who have one word for blue and green--but they still perceive the two as different and can point them out as different without needing a word to do it for them.

What does it matter whether the climate is changing due to our behavior or other causes? We've bred ourselves beyond the earth's carrying capacity, either way.

And why? Our economic and social systems are totally reliant on increasing populations and I challenge other readers to show where this is not true. How about in the housing industry, for instance? It's one of the main pillars of our economy and it is now gambling on immigration to support it's loggers, carpenters, plumbers, concrete workers, realtors, developers, etc.

The big trick, which few see, is to develop a sustainable economy that stresses quality of life over quantity. Right now, we're stuck in a suicidal plunge that we interpret as,

"we're flying!"

Hermit

It's very interesting to me that Ms. Meszkowski would choose to refer to our planet in the diminutive, "the earth" rather than choosing to actually name the planet as intentioned, "Earth". We capitalize Mars, Jupiter, Venus, etc., yet it seems that when it come to referring to our own world, many in this culture re-enforce the 'expiring' of Earth by continuing to refer to the planet of which we're a part as if it's so much dirt upon which we happen to be walking.

I was shocked once when I heard the captain on an episode of Star Trek: Enterprise, while talking to an 'alien', refer to their planet as "Vulcan" and then to ours as "the earth" in the very same sentence. Seems we're done with the concept of our world as a living being of which we are a part. After all, this perspective makes it clear that we don't own the world, and the catastrophic reductions in biodiversity that we're currently perpetrating are criminal. Instead, many choose to believe that it is our destiny and that the world is made up of "resources" for us to use as we deem convenient.

No doubt, this worldview (if it is indeed that) on the part of Ms. Meszkowski may also allow her to believe that Obama is a savior for the environment. Much more likely (I wish it were otherwise), it will be the Clinton years all over again, which saw Option 9 when it came to allowing the continued cutting of old growth forests in the Northwest, free trade agreements and so much more. In this case, we'll have 'clean' coal and other business-as-usual.

Oh, and to meglet444, you state "I'm willing to pay an extra dollar a gallon (at current prices or thereabouts) to fund green projects like improving mass transportation & constructing bike paths." Might I suggest that you simply calculate the number of gallons of gasoline you use (both at the pump and in electricity) and donate $1/gallon to Rainforest Relief (rainforestrelief.org) or another organization that's working to protect biodiversity during the current Mass Extinction? I believe the funds would be better spent that way rather than the government trying to figure out how (inefficiently) to use your taxes (since half will also go to fund the occupation of Iraq). : )

tim keating