OMG Fright gets an A in reading comprehension!
Pretty much everything you have posted is claiming a misinformation campaign, or right wing conspiracy, or something other than dealing with the substantive link I posted in my response. (Note the use of response, since I already admitted that my OP was a barb and not really a meaningful commentary on climate change.)
So either you never bothered to look at the link I shared, or you just decided to rail against the "propaganda machine" that I must be apart of. Your responses are as though you never bothered to read anything I said. In an attempt to have a meaningful discussion, I focused on one aspect of the climate change debate, that of whether or not man is having a meaningful impact one way or the other. I posted a link to a website that was authored by an IPCC scientist and presented a rather fair and balanced discussion on climate change information, maybe you checked it out, maybe you just decided that you know everything and don't need to read any more. Since you clearly haven't contributed anything substantive to the topic of mans impact, you seem to deflect the conversation and talk about a disinformation campaign. While that may or may not be true, either way, its not science and therefore not interesting to discuss to me.
Not sure where you got I watched a video, I never said that.. but with respect to he videos that have been posted, none of them are relevant to the point. If any of you are interested in exploring the science, then by all means jump in. If you want to have a rhetorical argument about left vs right propaganda I will let you have it. If you think the website I linked is part of some propaganda machine, then disprove the science, don't just launch a vacuous accusation. Weak minds resort to attacking the source rather than deal with the substance. In this case, the source is an IPCC scientist. The website is rather well cited, so please feel free to check it out and challenge the science.
For the record, I am not definitely decided on the issue of climate change. All I have stated is that the science I have reviewed is inconclusive as to mans impact on the state of the planet. This makes me skeptical about political agendas that want to make a lot of radical changes based on inconclusive science. That being said, I also don't need to see conclusive science before making reasonable, rational changes to how we use our limited energy/environmental resources. I drive a hybrid, recycle re-useables, use CFRs and LED lighting, etc. as an example of the little things that all of us can do to make things a little better.
