[moneyrunner]

"the world society is embarking on cure that could be worse than the disease - we just don't know."

I'm not so sure that we are in such a one-sided fight. I wrote on that here.

The opposition did not get into gear because the Eco-Left was considered too small a fringe. When they got into power, it's a different thing.

Now even the NY Times is trying to cool Al Gore's jets because they don't want to lose what little shred of credibility they have left. Actually that is a danger, because a dangerous lunatic foaming at the mouth is quickly subdued. A dangerous lunatic who appears rational (see "Silence of the Lambs") is a great danger.

[Thickman]

I had read your blog posting before - very adroit. However, I am not so optimistic. The media, UN and U.S. government (even Bush for goodness sake) are so vested in global warming alarm-ism that it will take a huge swing and a strong leader (C.I.C.) to change the national perception. All the NYT and other mouth pieces of its ilk are doing is damping down on the most radical and silly of their fringe contingent - their purpose being to add credibility to their core agenda by acknowledging that radicals are going off the deep end. In other words, if they disavow the nutty ones, then they can continue to promulgate the basic lie. It is the same tactic as when they (without flinching) claim that regional cooling phenomena are actually due to the overall warming "problem". We need a massive upheaval from the masses (internet, etc.) to give an eloquent leader the courage to tell the truth and rally against the greeno socialists.