The ad hominem tone of Joseph Romm's diatribe against "conservatives" is only to be regretted.

Scientists are divided on the global warming theory. It could just as easily be the beginning of a new ice age. Nobody knows for sure.

Panicky moves are to be avoided. Onesided articles like Mr Romm's do not help, they just clog he issue.

So far THERE IS NO GLOBAL WARMING AT ALL going on. Since the yera 2000 the mean global temperature has FALLEN 0,77 degrees centigrade.

So it seems that Mr. Romm so far is completely wrong. His tone is inexcusable. It should set alarm clocks ringing in all critical minds.

I am a nuclear engineer in Finland and possible climate change is discussed here almost constantly. So far it is only a theory. Much more research is needed.

A large fraction, perhaps a majority, of the American population believe in the end of the world as described in the Revelations of St. John the Divine. It is difficult to overstate the importance of this fact, as global warming is not mentioned in the Revelations, hence they simply will not believe the scientists.

Alternatively, they also DO wish the world to end, and soon. They look forward to it; a large, if not the largest, cause of America's support for Israel is American fundamentalist belief that the repatriation of Jews to Israel will bring about the end times.

A quote famously attributed to James Watt, the born-again christian named to head the Department of the Interior by Ronald Reagan, was to the effect that when the last tree in the world fell to the last axe, Christ will return. How do you stop madment like him? Especially when tens of millions, perhaps hundreds of millions of people, agree with him?

In 1933, the federal government hooked the rural south to the "grid," fundamentally changing that region forever. What is needed is a second Tennessee Valley project that offsets the cost of installing solar panels on private residences and businesses and hooking people up to the grid so that they can "sell back" excess energy. The technology is already available and individuals are already doing this, but to have a measurable effect it would need to be done on a large scale.

This would not work everywhere. But, in places like Southern California, Nevada, and Arizona-it would substantially reduce the need for fossil fuel consumption. If this were done en mass, I cannot conceive of a reason why cities such as Phoenix AZ should not be completely energy independent.

This would be beneficial in a second way. This would STIMULATE the economy. Production/Installation/maintenance would necessitate the creation of thousands of small and medium sized businesses who would need to employ millions of US workers (can't do hardware installation/maintenance from India).

The Repubs are always blathering on about tax cuts as a way to stimulate the economy. Across the board tax cuts are bullshit. But, if you target tax cuts to stimulate a new industry (like say the Internet), you can produce sustainable REAL growth.

This is a win-win, good for the environment and the economy.

The same people that are dismissing global climate change as not enough evidence, arent these same poeple that say "we cant take a chance on Iran getting nuclear weapons. Shouldnt they also be saying, "we cant take a chance that GCC is real and happening, we must take action now"?

There is no consistency in their opinions.

-0,77 C? Really??

take a gander at this little chart:

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/img/climate/research/2007/ann/global-jan-dec-error-bar-pg.gif

Before YOU write, you might want to check YOUR facts. Being a Nuclear Engineer clearly doesn't shield you from being an idiot, does it?

You wouldn't hesitate to denounce and demean a racist, a homophobe or a sexist based on their beliefs. You would also feel free to mock flat Earthers, and conspiracy theorists who believe that GW Bush is in cahoots with the Martian menace. Personally I put global warming deniers in with the last two examples.

Beliefs aren't sacred. They are there to be challenged, and if they cannot take being "demeaned" with facts then they aren't worth holding onto.

Might want to look at some data: http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/

While I firmly believe that the evidence shows that humans are causing the climate changes we see, the argument over it is idiotic. The facts all sides agree on are:

1. The Earth is warming up

2. Greenhouse gases are, in fact, greenhouse gases -- they cause global warming in some (disputed) measure

Which leaves us with only one logical position: if the climate is getting warmer, and we want to slow or stop that, we have to do the only thing we have control over -- reduce our contribution to the problem.

The more you argue that nature is the cause, the more critical, in fact, our role becomes. If nature is pushing up global temperatures by 4 degrees (just to pick a number), then every additional degree we add pushes the environment over yet another threshold of bad results (melting icecaps, more arid land, so on).

The following analogy should illustrate this. Imagine you are locked in your house and the thermostat on your furnace has gone mad -- the heat is on all the time. If it's winter outside, your furnace will make the house uncomfortably warm. If it's summer outside, your house may, in fact, heat up to lethal levels and you'll die in a 110 or 120 degree house in fairly short order.

The argument that the Bush crowd makes is that it's summer outside, who cares what the furnace is doing? Well, if you live in that house, you should care.

I really need to get into the soapbox business with all of the grandstanding going on in this blog. Outside of computer models and speculation, what scientific proof do your climate scientists offer? I'm sure the left will come back and say what about the floods, the droughts, the ice melting, the crazy storms, tornados, hurricanes, extreme heat...etc. When someone can actually prove that global warming is in fact caused by humans (and not by increased volcanic activity, solar radiation, normal cycles of the planet...etc) then I may give it some attention. Until then, it's just the flavor of the month for liberal grandstanding.