Is belief in Climate Change and low taxes, opposition to big government etc incompatable?

Well that's the thing. You can't really address a global problem like this with just free market ideals and a belief that people will always do the best thing with 100% freedom. I know that statements like that are nails on a chalk board for people who believe that the free market is lord and savior to every possible problem humanity could ever face, but it's the truth.

The people who say AGW is about expanding government and increasing taxes/spending have never presented a single alternative that would be more effective at curbing emissions. Basically they're shouting and ranting that we're choosing option A--slightly more control as well as financial incentives via cap and trade or taxes (which work with the free market)--for the sole purpose of increasing said control and taxes.

The problem is, of course, there is no 'option B'. And it's kind of immature to criticize the motives of an action if you can present no alternative to that action, don't ya think?

Lets say for arguments sake climate change is a hoax. How as a government of any political persuasion do you prepare your populace for the end of fossil fuels?

They are going to run out and when they do the developed world is looking extremely sick. There's reasonable evidence to support climate change, but not enough to say it isn't a natural occurrence.

Step back and look at the global picture. Developing nations are burning more fossil fuel every year. Economics says we should not give them the competitive cost advantage, unless the actual reserves are so low investing in carbon neutral technology is the medium term future. We use less oil and the price drops, so China buys more?

Conspiracy/hoax or smokescreen? Oil peaked in 2007; we use more now than we have at anytime in the last 200 years, so it hasn't got 200 left. Somewhere around 2100 it will run out. the green agenda is just paving the way to the inevitable.

In The Words Of Al Gore

"Global Warming Is'nt a Political Issue Its A Moral Issue"

I wouldn't necessarily say they're incompatible, but they are in conflict. Addressing climate change is going to require government regulation and a price on carbon (not necessarily a tax). For those of the politically conservative persuasion, these are highly unappealing options.

But there are certainly conservatives who believe AGW is correct but also oppose big government and taxes. For example, Newt Gingrich, John McCain, George Bush, and so on. The problem is that even these guys who believe AGW is correct aren't willing to take the necessary steps to mitigate the problem. However, at least they don't deny it exists.

It is not but I believe the agenda with cliamte change people is big government, government intrusion into everything, (i.e. socialism). OK let's just say the left is honest and we agree to carbon taxes. I would be all for it, seriously, if they would reduce other taxes equally. When they refuse that, they reveal their motives. It is simply a giant slush fund for socialist who think they understand economics. They think they can run an economy better than the millions constantly making independent decisions. History has shown that they can't but the arrogant always think they are smart enough. They aren't.

It could be because the people who believe in high taxes, left politics are also the same drones who have swallowed the whole AGW story.

It's possible to accept climate change and have a healthy skepticism of politics. But gullible is gullible and skeptical is skeptical. It's no surprise that these issues work out the way they do.

The Right is right about politics and environment...

Not at all the BNP has many interesting policies on the environment and climate change and you cant get much further right than them.

I've often wondered if the lefts belief in mass immigration and environmental sustainability is at odds with each other.

Not at all because the drive for personal and individual freedom causes a person to educate him/her self beyond what you can learn in school. It also creates a drive in the individual to determine through personal study and research the validity of policy statements from any group. Sometimes as with AGW the inserted false statements of the argument make it completely clear to anyone with an average education that the assumptions made are clearly impossible and this is why they are unable to provide evidence.

Generally skeptics are so determined to educate themselves to this degree because they were caught out by a con of some kind in their past and are determined not to get trapped again.

Generally the faithful supporters of cons like AGW are either participants in the fraud or are trapped by the rhetoric into faithfully following their chosen prophet because they lack the education to comprehend the fallacies the religious politically correct argument is based on. So you will find believers in faiths to complete agnostics amongst skeptics. What you will not find amongst skeptics are people who all believe alike or those who will blindly follow a charismatic prophet without questioning the prophets motives.

No of course not. "Global Warming" is your opinion as you have no idea if it will be warmer or colder in the future. The best you can do is guess.

So why would you make others pay for, and follow your beliefs? Do we not live in a free society where we can make these determinations for ourselves?

Not one prediction of "Global Warming" has ever come true, not one, and none ever will.

If you believe that "Global Warming" is bad, life your life according to your beliefs and leave the rest of us alone. I'm sure you wouldn't accept others making decisions for you.