[cogitator]

And you are still tacitly agreeing with him. Hmmm....

How, exactly?

[presidio9]

why would you post this goofball article (even with a clarification)? No matter how you try to cage it, it still ends up making look happy to associate with crackpots. For future reference, you might want to avoid posting the global warning opinions of Al Gore or any Hollywood celebrity. I's just trying to help a brother out here.

[MPJackal]

"And you are still tacitly agreeing with him. Hmmm...." "How, exactly?"

Ummm, how about this?

"But he's actually right about nuclear power being a good idea to provide more energy globally, and it would have an environmental benefit of decreased carbon emissions."

That was tough.

[Publius6961]

How, exactly?

This way: ... and I'm sure more than 50 years of economic effects from global warming.

By not qualifying a) "if any", or b) anthropogenic or natural, you are allowing the inference of either as equals, for those inclined one way or the other. You deem them equally likely, by ommission.
That's what "tacitly" means.