What would end the huge rift in opinion on whether or not climate change exists?

It's not huge.

There's a lot less controversy about this is the real world than there is on Yahoo answers:

http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/ho...

And vastly less controversy in the scientific community than you might guess from the few skeptics talked about here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on...

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/306/570...

"There's a better scientific consensus on this [climate change] than on any issue I know... Global warming is almost a no-brainer at this point. You really can't find intelligent, quantitative arguments to make it go away."

Dr. Jerry Mahlman, NOAA

Good websites for more info:

http://profend.com/global-warming/

http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/...

http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science/

http://www.realclimate.org/

"climate science from climate scientists"

EDIT - BOATMAN 1 - Read your own link. His whole point is that while there've been past changes, we're responsible for this one. "Of course, 1 Celsius ain't much compared to the 15°-20° Celsius cooling throughout the Cenozoic - but it's happening fast, and and it's not over yet! With all the changes the Earth has experienced over its history, one might think one more change is no big deal. In the long run, yes. But the future of humanity depends crucially on what happens in the "short run": the next millennium or two. If we didn't mess around with the climate, our Earth's climate might remain stable for another thousand years or more. As it is, we're bringing on more sudden changes."

I'm not sure. The tipping point is political, not dependent on scientific evidence. I don't think we should worry to much about the obstructionist at this point. Even Bush is now admitting there is a problem that his SUCCESSOR should resolve (he doesn't want to break his promises to his friends so this is the notice to start looking for another way around the problems. You got a couple of years to figure it out guys!)

It is all about money for the obstructionist. Natural changes are factored into predictions of global warming, but obstructionist refuse to accept this fact (see the latest IPCC reports). Science cannot convince them.

I think now is the time for AGW folks to take personal actions to reduce the carbon (and other sources) footprint. I know many do but grass-roots efforts are also needed to generate a social movement. Then the AGW folks should start at the local level with businesses and local politics to fight global warming. We have a majority, we will win if careful. Do grass roots stuff. Leave the obstructionist to do what they want. If they own a business, just don't buy from them. Make sure local and state contracts go to environmentally responsible companies. If obstructionist can't get rich obstructing, they will eventually start doing their part.

Awareness of the problem will take a disaster that is so huge and so unusual,that the debate will cease like a sudden hush!

We might have our answer in a few months when Atlanta runs out of water! It's gonna take an extreme weather event in the US. More than just an unusually powerful hurricane. Unfortunately,there will be lots human tragedy,and loss of life. I feel sorry for anyone who lives east of the Rockies this winter. They're gonna get hammered by crazy weather. My observations of weather patterns tells me that the way that the heat of the tropics gets circulated has changed. The reason that there were no major hurricanes to form or strike the US was that there was high level winds that sheared the tops off,preventing their development. That heat and moisture has to go somewhere. It seems that the heat energy from the tropics has moved northward. When that energy collides with the cold from the Arctic,we could see accumulations of several feet of snow with each storm.! The effect would be devastating! If you thought there was a trouble getting help to New Orleans,try getting through 10 ft of snow. Keep a sharp eye on the weather!

I think that there will always be a rift in opinion until something catastrophic happens.

I believe in global warming. We, as a world population, need to do more to reduce our carbon footprint. The earth needs to be here for our children and grandchildren and so forth.

But I also believe that those who are pushing awareness need to do more to show they mean it. I see global warming spokes people who live in huge houses that use way too much electricity, gas, and so forth and have a big carbon footprint - and they want us to believe in global warming. Case in point - it is true that Al Gore's home uses way more resources than Bush's ranch. If you were to look at their homes, you would think that Bush is a proponent of global warming and that Gore is not. They need to practice what they preach and reduce their carbon footprint. Then maybe they might have more followers.

Maybe if the people who are advocating change to save the environment show they mean it by their own actions and decisions, then more people will come over. That's my main beef with the people who advocate global warming. Not that I don't believe it, just that I'd like to see them do something. about it instead of just talk.

Nothing is going to change the skeptics opinions until the actual damage is done. Its our human nature not to believe what we don't want to believe. But as time goes by things will only get worse. The bad habits we have learned to live by are destroying the planet. Every time I see a Hummer I wonder why do they make those things. Every time I get the mail and most of it is junk, I wonder why do they keep cutting trees down to send junk mail. I don't no about the rest of you but there are lots of things I could learn to live without to save our planet for future generations.

If They TAX you till you Starve.SO the ANSWER to YOUR QUESTION IS THEY WANT a CARBON TAX to tax evil OIL Corporations, Democrat Presidential candidate Senator DODD. that means trickle down to you $8.00 a gallon Gas Higher food prices TRUCKS deliver food run on FUEL, higher electric they will build NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS its a low carbon foot print ."This is the problem with all this environmental claptrap . . . it's a convenient excuse for politicians to just start taxing people. Some of these guilt-laden, middle-class liberals think it's somehow good: 'Oh, that's my contribution to the environment.' It's not. You're just being robbed--it's just highway [bleeping] robbery."

Nothing!! What would make you wake up and realize that our Earth's climate is constantly changing and that we aren't in a Global Crisis, but experiencing a Natural occurance, do to the Earth still warming up from the last Ice Age?

There is no RIFT on the FACT that the climate seems to be warming. The dispute is on the cause of the warming.

Now before I get flamed read this and then describe the OPTIMUM temperature of the Earth.

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/temperature/

The tipping point is definitive evidence for WHY the changes in temperature occurred over say the last 5 million years.

The 'tipping point' for me would be:

Scientists proving that the HEAVIER CO2 molecule exists for any length of time in the higher atmospheres with enough volume to even BEGIN to 'REFLECT' Infrared photons back towards earth.

We have an obligation to REQUIRE Scientists to PROVE the HEAVIER CO2 molecule exists (in sufficient quantities) in higher atmosphere.

BTW - there is a MAJOR FLAW in their "Reflectivity THEORY". Any alarmists care to parrot that faulty THEORY?

MONEY is the key determiner

Those scientists that support global warming is created by humans are getting the grants to prove it.

Those that say it is a natural event and use scientific studies to prove it don't get the grants.

When the money runs out so will the controversy.

Read past issues of Discover Magazine 2007