Do 'skeptics' now agree we need to address man-made climate change?

Climate change is just one issue among many. Taking these together, I see it as like the Second World War. When the threat to the survival of the British people was serious enough, a coalition government was formed and there were no general elections. Similarly, governments sometimes impose martial law if an emergency such as a forest fire or other natural disaster is a sufficient threat. This will eventually have to happen. However, it will probably be too late, people will think it's something like the imposition of a NWO and then we will all die in horrible agony. In fact, that'll probably happen anyway because of the disastrous dumbing down of the education system.

Linlyons,

Thank you for actually taking the time to look at this from another perspective. Fact is that we need to work towards change. CO2 is a problem, but not a life ending, destroy the planet problem. The do whatever it takes to fix it mentality has got to stop. Increasing our taxes is easy to say without an understanding of what it will actually do. I know it will do little to me. It may increase my costs, but I have got a buffer and things that I can cut back on. Take Ohio, where my parents live, they have been rocked by this recession. They get most of their energy from coal and they don't make that much money. The current plans will substantially increase the cost of power for them, many will not be able to afford heating their own houses.

Work on the technology. Make it economically viable, then we can make positive changes without killing our economy.

I have already highlighted quite a few things that the government could do, which would not be a tax, would only help the economy and could have a very good impact on the expansion of renewable energy like nuclear and geothermal. Try for intelligent less economically impactful changes. That is what is warranted by the 0.74 degrees of change over the last 100 years. Placing in a large tax scheme, that has met with disaster in Europe on quite a few occasions or raising the cost of gasoline, is not warranted by the problem and may cause more problems then it solves.

Paul's Alias 3,

How many accounts have you burned through now? You think the insulting is making your side look good? You think it is helping your cause? I watched Glenn Beck for the first time, and truly could not stand him. Probably because he used the same tactics that you use.

Paul's Alias 2,

Wow, That is truly amazing that someone can imitate you, and then you come on show that their imitation was spot on. You think this makes you look good. LOL.

I can't help but agree with hungus, when you have someone spouting of psuedo-science, it can be kind of convincing. However, the minute that person quotes a movie like The Core, you should immediately second guess anything they wrote. If that you believe that move is based on science, maybe it is time for you to turn off the TV and open up a book because your brain is turning to mush.

Linlyons said it pretty well.

I've lived in all kinds of places.

When I lived in Boulder, Colorado (a very educated, progressive, environmental... etc. kind of place) I helped some friends move to Del Norte, Colorado.

The wife of the couple had just graduated, was going to be a teacher and her first teaching job was in nowhere Colorado (Del Norte).

As we neared the town in the U-Haul and it became obvious to me the kind of place they were moving to I said, "This is the kind of place where you burn your trash."

They laughed and made fun of me since I 'obviously' didn't know that people couldn't possibly live like that anymore in today's America.

The joke was on them they found out in the following months.

Naivety pulled them by the nose into a town that couldn't afford to be politically correct.

I think it was around six months before the realities of nowhere America forced them and their political correctedness out of the area.

Making people who already live on the edge pay more to live will bring some serious problems that the bulk of the politically correct individuals can't seem to comprehend.

Unrest is certain.

Looks like I have a stalker "Paul's Alias 3" throwing temper tantrums about me pointing out the approximate equivalence of global warming deniers to holocaust deniers.

For the record I think holocaust deniers are more siister, but global warming deniers are less intelligent.

Ironically it is interesyting that Holocaust deniers do not stalk people or fake Dana's name--we again see the superiority of Holocaust deniers over global warming deniers.

The problem still remains as to just HOW much climate change is attributable to man, AND is this good or bad or BOTH.

You have to remember that the SAME "experts" who come up with THESE theories and the "climate models" are the SAME ones who came up with the CURRENT weather forecasting models used by the weather services.

IF they can NOT get the LOCAL weather correct 24 hours in advance, consistently, just HOW reliable are their models forecasting the weather events for the next 10 to 100+ years GLOBALLY?

They are so INACCURATE that their "results" are called "projections" based on several, (like 100+,) "what if" variables, rather than "predictions".

THIS does NOT lead me to believe they know what they are doing with any certainty.

Like one movie, (the CORE), shows at one point, (and DOES put things in perspective;) commander asking scientist question; answer leads commander to state, "then you don't know, you're guessing," to which scientist responds, "That's all science is, commander, best guess."

AS LONG AS IT IS GUESSWORK, then they do NOT "know." I do not see any valid reason to have my life or lifestyle upset by the government or anybody else based on somebody's GUESS!!

A guess is NOT facts!

Does the following make sense:

I drink coffee, there are no elephants around, therefore there are no elephants around BECAUSE I drink coffee.

NO!; agreed; But MANY of the "facts" of climate change operate on even WORSE logic than the foregoing coffee-elephant "fact".

I wasn't going to answer this because it's hard for me to weigh in on what someone "should" do, but F100's post was one of the more inane things I've ever read.

*** hoc, ergo proper hoc, bitches.

Edit: Yahoo! censored my Latin but not my obvious insult. Well played.

Obviously by "skeptics" you mean deniers. most sceptics had long ago accepted the fact of androgenic global warming

Hell, no, because they're all Holocaust deniers!!!

It's a lot like if I go to a baseball game, and the Boston Red Sox are about to lose, do they just walk out of the game? Hell no!!!

And it's HOT outside! We should go and hang all the non-deniers!!! Grrr!

no