[RWebb]

Now here we have a thread with 1750+ views - some of which are no doubt from normal people.

Go back and take a look at the two sides again. One side cites climate scientists and panels of climate scientists such as the National Academy, the Nation Research Council and others. The conclusion that golbal warming is primarily caused by humans is based on the work of 2,500 scientists in more than 130 countries, has been exposed to extensive peer review, and is accepted by nearly every scientist and political leader - even G. Bush recently accepted this.

The other side relies on web blogs by those who have no credentials, have performed no research, and no nothing of atmospheric physics or chemistry. They rely on personal attacks, yelling in print, changing the subject and various debater's tricks, and appears to be authored by teenagers such as mule and others. The "highest authorities" they have marshaled for their view are one climate scientist who has been in the pay of oil companies for many years. This is not competitive grant money he obtained for research sponsored by oil co.s - it is direct payola. The rest of the "experts" on this side consist of TV weathermen - most lacking even a 4 year meteorology degree - who were signed up as "experts", a few scientists in other, unrelated fields, and a variety of people whose expertise and even existence has never been verified. This side relies heavily on politicization of debate - righ wing blogs, fuzzy news outlets with a political backing and others "push" this agenda, since the normal news outlets refuse to back it.

Anyone at all can come to a reasonable conclusion as to the veracity of each side.



Well, let the kiddies start their screaming again...