EddieWalker said:
The sad realization has overcome me. We are no longer debating this. Those who were debating earlier have gone quiet. Maybe they've developed some doubts as to what they are hearing in the media? Maybe they just go tired of not being able to convice anybody that there world is gonna end?
Too bad, there were a few good points brought up.
Eddie
Like most discussions, when most have said their piece, it slows down... I wonder if anyone has changed their view one way or the other based on what we have discussed?
I've learned alot from both "sides", but my view (that we are contributing and should take some action) is fundamentally unchanged.
-Alternate theories have been presented - natural cycle, sunspots, etc.
-Even if we have contributed, we should concentrate on dealing with the potential consequences, not the CO2
-Credibility of "consensus" science vs. scientific method (rightfully) challenged
-Correlation vs. causation
-Implications of govt. action (wealth redistribution etc) based on IPCC report
-GW likened to a religion
-Future impact of developing countries.
I think N80 summed it up best when he stated (roughly) that the big changes implied by the IPCC report require more substantial proof than consensus science.
I suppose I'm still stuck on the precautionary principle - it will "cost" (however you want to define it) us less to change our behavior now rather than later.