One of the most disturbing things I have read about is the politicization of science. It seems as though dissenting views sometimes get supressed and the scientists ostracized. GOvernment grants and postion in a university can often create a conforming behavior. Unfortunately the scientists offering a dissenting opinion to the 'accepted' theory of 'global warming' are now the ones being put on the sidelines. Without unbiased science, we are in for some potentially bad choices in politics based on technology.

Certainly the climate is changing; its been changing forever. Right now its warming, but its still cooler than it has been in recent past (50-60 years). Its also warmer than it has been in the past 250 years (mini ice age). Is human activity involved? Certainly. HOw much and how much we can effect the climate is certainly open for debate. Us shutting off our carbon emissions may be like pour a cup of water on a bonfire; not nearly enough. The point is we just don't know.

That lack of knowledge is not reason to just take no action--we should do what we can to control our emissions, but it is also not reason to dramatically harm our economy by adopting certain measures as outlined in the Kyoto treaty. That treaty was ignored by the CLinton administration and the BUsh administration. Its standards have also not been met by all the European countries that signed it.

In the end, humans, although dumb as Wouter thinks they are, will adjust, both to the climate change and to the need to change their habits as we go along and we will adapt to what we can't control and will perservere. Its what we humans do.

David
H20 781