Everyone who is taking a stand for our planet should also be honored as well. So give an EarthE Award, EarthE Kiss or other EarthE Honors to ecological friends that deserve a little piece of the Nobel Peace Prize.

Stele Ely

www.Earthe.org

The sun?!? I can't ... oh man. Global warming isn't directly caused by the ... I mean, you know there's this thing called the greenhouse effect and ... hahaha nevermind. oh dear. Bless your heart.

By the way, calling me a loon because I happen to agree with the scientific consensus of, you know, the world doesn't make me feel bad. Or strengthen your arguments. It just makes you look like you don't have much of a critical argument to work with and are reduced to name-calling.

Name-calling makes the gerbil cry, but remember, he's sensitive. snicker.

But it doesn't surprise me that you mention economics. Not at all. Some people worry over the human race and our responsibilities to the earth. They think of the long view. You worry over your wallet evidently. You appear to be in it for the short view. Okay, your perogative.

And if you think, which we see you do, that global warming is not real, or at the very most, that we should fiddle while Rome burns, it's still amazing, at the same time, that you can argue over possible, mainly unknown changes in the global economy, (good god, economics! It's so unpredictable--worse then the weather!) ones which even an economist could only guess at. We have different priorities. That's all there is to it.

Sigh. I'm bored now. Go ahead and rant and rave a little more. It will make you feel better.

But, Gore still won, and it's a pretty damned wonderful vindication.

You failed to notice that out of all the scientists I cited, only one was American. And you fail to address the abosute, provable falsehoods in Gore's film. No Pacific islanders are fleeing to New Zealand, despite Gore's asserting so in the film. Polar bears are not drowning en masse. A grand total of four polar bear carcasses were found, and their deaths were attributed to a storm.

How much evidence do you need to see that Gore plays fast and lose with the facts in his film?

More important, how much of our world economy are you willing to wreck to try to "fix" something that (a) is probably not our fault and (b) can't be fixed in the first place because of the primary cause is out of our control: the sun.

Want to fight polution? Fine, I'm right there with you. But it's a sorry day when a film full of provable falsehoods and squishy "science" not only wins an Oscar, it gets the maker a Nobel. Just shows the gullibility and herd mentality of loony liberals.

It's kind of great that 'the other guy' feels so strongly about this issue that he's hunted up the handful of scientists left who either 1) don't admit to global warming or 2) don't believe with 90% certainty that human beings are either causing or accelerating the situation.

It's great because it's great to have so much passion about something.

However, it's also dangerous to overlook the majority of scientists who disagree with the handpicked views of the few scientists left, the ones that the other guy has brought to the argument. Scientists often disagree. However, the consensus over global warming world-wide is, well, unprecedented.

Nevertheless, even with the majority, of course, one cannot fully rely on it to be correct. True, absolutely true. It's more likely that, because the major scientists around the world agree, that global warming exists and that we've either caused it or rushed it forward. But, obviously, nothing is certain.

However, to be concerned, to try to change behaviors at this point, to work to fix situations that, frankly, are already thoughtless, selfish and foolish---like the pollution of our environment, etc.--isn't alarmist or crazy or ridiculous. To ignore the opinions of the majority and to handpick the opinions of a few is careless, to say the very least.

If I listed all of the scientists and bodies of scientific organizations who believe global warming is happening and, with 90% certainty, that we are responsible, we'd run out of space on Salon.

The reason this denial happens in the US is because of money and because of politics. And because many of us don't want to give up our big cars and wastefulness. It is not because of scientific consensus. Not because of scientific facts.

I see that it makes some people huffy and unhappy to give up these things or to believe that their leaders might be being somewhat untruthful so that they could make money.

I'm passionate, too. I'm passionate about the one and only world in which I live and in which my child will be born. I also can't stick my head in the sand. The arctic ice has melted so much that we've got water passages where we didn't have those before. Saying 'it's not good' is a understatement. People have been forced to move from their homes as they were swallowed by water. The documented evidence of weather changes is frightening. If I can do anything to make a difference, I'd be a fool to not do it. Just because you don't want to believe it, in the face of so much scientific consensus and so many, damn, ACTUAL events is, indeed, amazing to me. Is agreeing with your political party so important that you're willing to damn everyone? That kind of thinking just amazes more and more all the time.

Mostly, though, it convinces me that those who protest so much must know, somewhere inside of themselves, that there's some sort of problem with their reasoning. After all, if they didn't, why in the world would they be so crazy emphatic? They'd just say, "Oh who cares? We'll see we are right in the end" and be done with it. Yet, here we are.

I think my world and my own responsibility to it comes before my pocketbook. It's as simple as that. I think that's something to get passionate about.

Well, that and I'm super eager to see Fox interview that gerbil. Really! The noble gerbil knows so much!