Its a little comical to me when the problems with skeptics models "prove" the skeptics wrong. But on the other hand the problems with alarmists models are shrugged off. There is no accurate model, not to date, by either side.
Yet policy makers are willing, some are desiring, to shut down the use of fossil fuels based on these shoddy models. A move that would have severe consequences for our economy.
There are some loons on both sides of the debate. There is arguable science used by both sides. There is a majority opinion on the debate but the science isn't settled on AGW, it's still just a theory. The science is pretty settled on the possibility of a runaway greenhouse effect....that ain't close to happening.
The economy MIGHT be harmed if the alarmists are correct.
The economy WILL be harmed if the alarmists are successful in enacting their restrictions on fossil fuel consumption.
And proponents of AGW do little to sway my opinion on the matter when they refuse to argue the science of the opposition and instead attack the character of those on the other side of the debate. "If you can't debate them...just try and discredit them."
