Comment on an article from The Australian online newspaper:
It's refreshing, at least, to see that the (global warming) debate continues. The warming advocates that stake their position on some imagined concensus of the scientific community--as if scientific fact were up to a vote--are disingenuous, at best. As difficult as it is for lay persons to make rational judgements on such matters without first-hand knowledge of the science involved, we must. For it is our very lives, liberties and property that hang in the balance.
According to President Obama and his allies, a crisis (real or imagined) is a terrible thing to waste. Clearly the political and industrial opportunists are staking their claims to the spoils of the "climate change" crisis and middle class minions in America, Australia, and elsewhere will doubtless pay the ransom.
In the absense of scientific expertise, common sense and skepticim may be our best friends. While the wisdom of conservation and environmental reverence are self-evident, is it rational to believe we puny mortals can actually control earth's climate? Have we ever done so? Most of us can barely balance our checkbooks! Who stands to benefit (financially and politically) from "winning" the argument? Why is one scientifically legitimate viewpoint excoriated and the other extolled in the mainstream media? And why should the news media show preference at all?
The jury is still out on this one. There is good reason to doubt the computer models. There are plenty of ignoble motives to be considered--particularly among proponents of the crisis, but potentially, on both sides. Proceed we must, for there is no turning back. But let caution and reason be our guides.