[ QUOTE ]
Another problem with this argument is that general scientific opinion is so one sided that you'd have to believe in a major conspiracy theory.
[/ QUOTE ]
There is no need to invoke some sort of conspiracy theory. I'm sure if all you read was scientific journals you would have a fairly moderate view of climate change. Sure its happening probably not going to be the disaster everyone thinks its going to be. IMO its the sensationalists that make the most money out of this. How much would Al Gores movie have grossed if he claimed "moderate temperature rise, we can probably adapt to it". How many news papers will sell on the headline "Temperatures to rise 1 degree in 100 years!!!!", its always 2-5 and they write about the consequences of the worst case scenario.
I also think that there are other mechanisms that might kick and be
beneficial
[ QUOTE ]
. . . a warmer planet has beneficial effects on food production. It results in longer growing seasons-more sunshine and rainfall-while summertime high temperatures change little. And a warmer planet means milder winters and fewer crop-killing frosts. . . . Infrared satellite readings show that the Earth has been getting greener since 1982, thanks apparently to increased rainfall and CO2. Worldwide, vegetative activity generally increased by 6.17 percent between 1982 and 1999-despite extended cloudiness due to the 1991 eruption of Mount Pinatubo and other well-publicized environmental stresses. . . . When dinosaurs walked the earth (about 70 to 130 million years ago), there was from five to ten times more CO2 in the atmosphere than today. The resulting abundant plant life allowed the huge creatures to thrive. . . . Based on nearly 800 scientific observations around the world, a doubling of CO2 from present levels would improve plant productivity on average by 32 percent across species.
[/ QUOTE ]
There is also massive amounts of money to be made in
global warming 'solutions'
[ QUOTE ]
A joint British government and business statement listed on Tuesday steps needed to improve the European carbon market, but avoided the most contentious issue of how to curb utility windfall profits.
British parliamentarians last week cited research estimating that UK power companies, the highest polluting business sector, would earn 800 million pounds ($1.54 billion) a year as a result of participation in the first phase of the scheme from 2005-07.
[/ QUOTE ]
Just some things to think about