Lots of fussing about the environmental report, all of whiich is silly. There is no policy change, and the statistics on the NOAA site indicate warming is occurring, although we do not know why. I have been spending a lot of time trying to read a variety of scientific sites to try and see which places have correct data and which have skewed data for an agenda. I am sorry to say that this is very difficult, because BOTH sides of this controversy are picking and choosing data to suit their agendas.
Frankly, I am not even sure about the NOAA site, because they use tree-ring data as a factor, and other sources discount the use of tree rings. Yikes!
Anyway, I am determined to make an intelligent decision about this controversy rather than being stampeded one way or the other.
There is a great danger in taking a scientific position based on politics...if you are proven to be wrong scientifically, then your politics goes down the tube as well.
You're wise to take any report on Global Warming with caution. Just not enough emperical knowledge, nor time elapsed, to really make a sound decision one way or the other. (I tend to err on the side of caution.)
Great book out called, The Skeptical Environmentalist, by Bjorn Lomborg. He concedes there might be global warming, but scoffs at the idea that man is the main contributor to it.
He is being raped by the "environmentalists" which tells me it must be pretty darn good.