How did the Climate Change issue end up as a battle between politician-businessmen and scientists?

The first guy to raise the alarm reverses himself. Why?

http://www.livescience.com/19875-gaia-lovelock-cli...

Did the "business men" get to him? Does that even sound plausible that a guy with one foot in the grave would alter his opinion for personal gain?

There was a TV documentary called 'Earth 2100': the Final Century of Civilization?' that dealt with the consequences of man made climate change. In the show they have a hurricane that hit NYC. They were building a series of locks or something to try to prevent it,but it didn't work and the city was doomed. This is more than being about storms and rising levels of sea water. It is also about water shortages. There are so many arguments opposing climate change and so many unbelievers that they will be caught off guard when the real bad stuff starts to happen. Wait until the first major city runs out of water. We might see some place like Las Vegas abondoned because there simply isn't any water to support it.

Edit:How did it become more of a political issue. Well, when you see a debate with nine Republicans and a moderator asks which of them think evolution is true,see how many hands are raised. We have a majority of the population that are scientifically illiterate. It is strange that in the 21st century,many on the right have made it a virtue to be stupid about the simplest of things in science. They don't know what a scientific theory is or what the scientific method is. Their lives are being impacted more by science and technology than at any other time in history.

You have religious people who are claiming that the hurricane that hit NYC is punishment from god for all kinds of sin. The truth is that this is pinishment for not listening to scientist. It is punishment for calling them liars and crooks.

There is this guy who just said,"Why wreck the economy over something that is going to happen anyway?" Disregarding how the economy is being wrecked by the changes in the climate right now shows what you are up against. It's okay if we lose major cities to these events, wait untill he is impacted by some climate event. And, what about the lives of the people. How many dying people will you accept because of climate change.Forest fires and droughts are going to cause a lot of our population to become refugees. I'm not sure where the people in the SouthWest will go when large areas of desert become even drier but I wouldn't head for a coastal area to resettle.

Neil DeGrasse Tyson said "Innovation drives economy,it's especially been true since the Industrial Revolution." So why are the people in the party that is supposed to be about business and making money so ignorant when it comes to science? They remind me of John Rockefeller who founded Standard Oil and made all of the money. He was a religious person but it didn't prevent him from being a selfish person. His philosophy was that it was his devine right to make money and if you stood in his way then you were against him and if you were against him you were against God. He was willing to listen to scientist as long as they could make him money otherwise science was useless. This kind of thing is ingrained in our society, and you may have figured out that it really is an issue with me.

About 10,000 years ago places like Detroit, Michigan and Moscow, Russia were under 10,000 feet of ice. There has been substantial global warming since that time, and the warming continues. Coastal towns and cities of the ancient Greeks and Romans are now under 20-30 feet of water. Sea level has been rising one foot per century for at least the last 20-30 centuries. Even Jamestown, Virginia, settled in 1607 is mostly under 3-4 feet of water nowadays. Our Earth was even warmer than today during the last interglacial warm spell, known scientifically as the Eemian period, some 130,000 years ago. During the Eemian interglacial warm period before the last ice age, sea level was at least 20-30 feet higher than today, and both polar ice caps completely melted. I know it is hard for you to believe, but our human ancestors actually survived the fierce global warming of that time, even though the Earth was much hotter than it is today. I feel we will be equally able to survive the coming warm weather again. Every indication is that both polar ice caps will melt again this time, no matter what humans do or don't do. Atmospheric CO2 levels, though higher than 200 years ago, are still at very near record low levels compared to earlier ages on Earth. Why wreck the world economy to prevent something that will happen anyway?

Check out the following link:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eemian

Please quite claiming that you understand science. You have repeatedly stated that hurricanes are caused by man made climate change and therefore are a recent atmospheric development. That hurricanes and typhoons have been documented for centuries belies that "fact".

PS. Al Gore is not a scientist.

Democracy gives people the false perception that *everything* is a matter of opinion, and the even worse belief that all opinions are equal. Science is not democratic, and those who have their opinion falsified by actual data try to muddle that reality.

just follow what happened before- the Tobacco industry did the same denying any link between smoking and cancer.

Science has done its job. Changes to society is political. Smart business will catch the trend and invest in post carbon economy.

Are there about 5 people who's job is to flood the net with propaganda like this, all posting under ACS?

If so, congrats on being employed for the last 5+ years! Or being that 'productive' if your actually only one person!

-And do you pick the 'best' answer by who gets 5 disagrees the fastest?

It has nothing to do with proving (or disproving) climate change, It's:

Because scientists can't help but be influenced by where they get their grant money and the political agenda of the universities that control their tenure.

Because politicians with a socialist/one world order agenda USE climate change to push increasing government power.

Because businessmen USE climate change to push their "solutions" to stopping climate change.

Envrionmental regulations hurt business. Businesses will do anything to keep making money, and that includes ignoring climate change to continue to pollute.

Without the environment and it's resources, there is no business.

Look at it a different way.

If the scientists are wrong and we create green energy etc. nothing happens... we end up with cleaner air and a cleaner environment.

If the neoconjobs are wrong.... and we did nothing... in 100 years the planet is dead.

Which is the smarter bet?

Profit is the end in capitalism. It doesn't matter what it is, either. Science can only go so far in such a chaotic and absurd economic system that repeatedly goes into crisis. A lot of science goes into research on financial instruments and all sorts of wonderful gadgets capitalists love to play with. Science goes into funding drugs that are only temporary treatments rather than cures. Not only that, the science is then "copyrighted," and stays in the secret hands of the capitalists.