Unless you believe that our vast carbon emissions and other pollutants are actually doing positive things for our global environment it seems to me the entire global warming man made/not man made, exists/does not exist debate is moot.

Clean up dirty industry, change the habits of billions, invest/invent new cleaner forms of energy and living. Then when the sky is clear and the rivers run clean if warming is still an issue we can talk about it then.

Interesting news out of Seattle this week.

When Bush was busy not signing the Kyoto agreement, Seattle went ahead and committed to the plan themselves. The results?

Mixed.

While they have reduced their greenhouse gas emissions overall to below 1990 levels, the goal outlined in the Kyoto agreement, those gains are on pace to be wiped out very shortly by continued increases from transportation as population grows. They're unlikely to keep below 1990 levels through 2012, the end-date for the Kyoto protocol measurements.

But still, if they can go it alone and make some pretty significant progress, that bodes well for what might be accomplished if everyone is on board and cities receive support from the feds. It also emphasizes why there is so much focus on the auto industry. Take transportation out of the picture in Seattle and they're doing stellar, every other segment is on the decline in terms of greenhouse gasses. If we can reverse the trend in transportation as well, I think we can really start to see a difference.

Well said, Moonliner. There are so many good reasons to pursue alternative energy, promote clean air, restore natural habitats and so on, even if humans are not causing climate change.

I've read about the hacked emails. I see that one researcher stepped down from his post for suggesting a "trick" that skewed data - something I agree is best brought to light. Bad science is bad science. But much of the fuss is simply about attitude. The emails contained insider chat in which global warming skeptics were called idiots, and so on. Totally irrelevant to the actual science. (Such name-calling takes place out in the open, in comment sections on websites on all sides of every issue, for instance.)

I have a long way to go before I can even pretend to have a grasp on earth science and the data supporting or not supporting climate change. Ultimately, the facts will speak for themselves. Real science has great self-correcting mechanisms. Public discourse and private chatter, not so much.

Except if you dig beyond the one-liner that was cherry picked out, he wasn't doing anything that falsified data or affected the conclusions of the research in question. He was just talking about selectively graphing the data that most clearly demonstrated the conclusions of the research.

Would it have been better to print the entire raw data (again, going past the one-liner, that's exactly what his colleagues replied to him with)? Perhaps. But boy do I understand where the dude is coming from. When facing people who walk outside in January and say, "Look, it's 32 degrees today, take THAT global warming!!!" I can appreciate the urge to avoid printing a graph that might, to people who don't have a grasp of statistics, appear to show a downward trend in temperatures.

No, it's not good scientific reporting. But it doesn't change the reality of the data behind it. It was just one guy trying to avoid having to justify his conclusions from spurious misinterpretation of the data by masking out the bit that could be misinterpreted. The guy is still an ass, but it's hardly a smoking gun that brings down the entire theory of global warming.

No, not in any sense a smoking gun. ( I saw it somewhere referred to as "not a smoking gun, it's a mushroom cloud!" roll eyes)

Had a cool and relevant video to link here, but I've lost it. Be back soon.

If you want to discredit and dismiss decades of climate change research from scientists all across the globe just because of some unfortunate emails from one organization, then, by the same logic, we need to abandon the free market system because of Bernie Maddoff.

this is what trouble's me the most - population keeps growing, and not only that take a look at the 2 Billion people of China and India who are both developing a carbon consuming middle class and I think we're focusing too much on prevention and not enough on adaptation as I wonder what we could morally do to curb population or prevent people from leaving states of poverty.

But that said, NPR had a nice piece on what Florida is doing to prepare for potential rises in sea level and flooding that may ensue

Colonize Mars.

D'oh, and I just bought beachfront property here!

In Phoenix?