I am not a scientist any more than Al Gore is, or the new guru Leonardo Di Caprio. However I find it more that a little suspicious that those other non-scientists who accept every premise regarding g****l w*****g are also those who look at every turn to grow the scope, depth and power of the federal government. That could be simply coincidental but surely provides some room for skepticism of their sincerity - particularly when one considers their own personal carbon footprint.
As a non-scientist, here's how I think on the subject:
- it is possible that we are on a warming trend
- it is possible that the warming trend is caused by human activity.
- it is a sure thing that by use of carbon based energy, the human condition has been greatly improved - the length and quality of life increased everywhere it has evolved.
- it is nearly a sure thing that if we allow the Al Gore solutions, the cost of energy will go up, along with the corresponding reduction of living standards here.
- it is an even more likely probability that wh**ever we do, those developing economies, like China and India, will continue to inhabit the same planet we do and will continue to further their positions with the cheapest energy sources available - thereby both improving their ability to compete economically with us and offsetting wh**ever "improvements" we achieve.
- geologists offer a theory that we are at the end of a g****l w*****g cycle and entering a new ice age - if there is any possibility that theory is valid, man made g****l w*****g may actually be a blessing by postponing that catastrophe.
- finally, the ability of both climate and economic experts to fully predict the total impacts of g****l w*****g are very limited - those impacts could in many, if not most, ways actually improve life on earth.
- and let's remember that the more we grow government the less liberty we have - and history clearly shows the lose of liberty is never offset with gains in security.