[I do not intend this post to step on anybody's toes, or to insult anyone's firmly held beliefs. However, any discussion that implicates "global warming" to any degree almost inevitably devolves into two dissenting camps influenced by political beliefs. I wish to avoid the outcome with all of my good friends on Pond Boss.]
Best wishes to all,
FishinRod
If it's a matter of politics then it can only be because of economic interests. With regard to global warming, sites like the one you referenced, are there for sole purpose of discrediting the science of global warming. In most every case, the authors of those papers would disagree that their findings do that. Most are being presented out of context to make arguments the authors wouldn't agree with. This is reminiscent of leaded gasoline, Freon, and emission control. Without government policy and it becoming a "political issue" nothing would have been done about it. None of the fear monger's threats of what would happen if something was done about it ever came true. Only the advocate's predictions were actually realized. Lead levels in blood decreased substantially, air quality in population centers improved and are much better than then even with more cars on the road, the ozone is replenishing. It's no different now but the stakes are higher and slower to evolve.
For me it isn't a political issue. We know that we are driving the accumulation of greenhouse gases but we've only begun to see it's effects accumulating. It's a train we can't stop on a dime and if we wait to reverse the trend the damage that will accumulate will be greater. I'm a long way from the coast, but I still care. I have interests in Oil & Gas. But I still care and I hope we are up to this challenge. In the end, I can assure you that Pierre L. Gosselin will not be remembered as any kind of visionary ... but those that innovate the solutions will of course be. That's a prediction you can take to the bank
