That right there, John. Hubris. You assume that our scientists know EVERYTHING there is to know about climate and environment. They do not. They don’t even know a tenth of what makes our world work. They can’t accurately predict what the weather will be like a month from now, other than the vaguest generalities, and yet we are expected to believe that the “science is settled” on what the weather will be like in a year? Ten years? Fifty? A hundred?

Should we enact any of these ridiculous cap and trade Kyoto/Copenhagen plans, one of three things WILL happen: It will change things for the better, it will change things for the worse, or it will have absolutely no effect whatsoever, other than draining our economy and handing it over to countries that are not particularly friendly towards us.

One third of a chance that something good will come of this, when the science is FAR from settled, is too great a chance for us to be taking, particularly during a world-wide economic crisis. One of the biggest brains at MIT, who has been correlating as much data as is available on the subject, is saying that Man’s affect on the climate has been negligible AT BEST. Two people from the EPA are saying that cap and trade isn’t going to do anything to help the environment. Lord Monkton, who has actually studied the problem rather than just regurgitated the meme like Gore, has shown that even if we halted ALL forms of emission, it would take more than thirty years to alter ONE degree of temperature. Also, despite numerous attempts to get the AGW crowd to debate the subject, none have accepted the challenge from Lord Monkton, or the Czech President, or anyone else calling shenanigans on this scam.

If they are so certain of their facts, if they are so definitively in the right on this, why, do you suppose, they are refusing to debate about it?

Then there is the other end of this; what if we enact this agenda, and it winds up screwing up the environment? They’re saying it’s getting too hot, they want to do things to cool it off…what happens if they get it wrong and it gets TOO cold? What if they wind up damaging the climate to such an extent that we’re faced with an even GREATER crisis? I will remind you that far more people die from cold than from heat; warmer temperatures ENCOURAGES plant growth, providing more food for the herbivores, which in turn provides more food for the carnivores and omnivores. More plants also means more production of oxygen, which we need for BREATHING. Colder temperatures kills plants, which in turn creates a shortage in the food supply, which becomes systemic.

And all this becomes moot as it’s not the US that’s causing the bulk of the problem. China and India each produce far more pollution than the US, and they are flatly refusing to alter course. And yet it’s us nasty Americans that are being blamed AND being called on to pony up the majority of the funds for all this stupidity. That alone is enough to set off the bullshit alarm.

Lots of folks believe in Big Foot, the Loch Ness Monster, UFO’s, the Bermuda Triangle, and that Scientology works. Doesn’t mean they are scientifically correct. And the Pentagon plans. That’s what they do. Changing climate can cause national security issues. Doesn’t mean they believe it is caused by Mankind. As the climate is shifting to a cooler one, having more liquid water locked up in ice can cause drought conditions and impeded the ability to move the ships.

Haven’t been able to produce ANY other reason for the changes in climate? Wrong again. There are hundreds of reasons why our climate is changing. For one, our climate is not FIXED. Nor is our orbit, nor is the orbit of our sun or our moon, nor are the tides, nor are the birth and death rates of the various flora and fauna, nor is the ambient cosmic energy that flows throughout the universe. You seem to believe that this is a world of constants. It isn’t. It fluctuates constantly. Throughout our world’s history, weather has been warm, and it has been cool. It has gone to extremes of both. It will continue to do so whether humans are here or not.

You are so given to blanket statements, no wonder you buy the “consensus.” I’m a “climate denier.” I don’t believe the world is less than 10k years old. I don’t believe the Grand Canyon was created by the biblical Flood. And I have no verified reason to believe that Man is causing the current climate conditions.

By the way, the leadership of the military IS a few upper echelon officers. What, you think there are THAT many people in charge? All those chiefs, and hardly any braves? No. There are far, far fewer brass than regular soldiers. As we learned in the Major Muslim attack, a major in the military outranks about 90 to 95 percent of the rest of the military. And the final buck-stops-here head of the military is ONE MAN, the President.

You and the rest of these consensus junkies are the blind men examining part of an elephant, insisting it must be rope or a snake or a tree. You don’t take ALL the data, as a whole, to form a hypothesis. You are taking snippets, much like liberals tend to do when they know they are in an argument they can not win honestly. Worse, you are not only trying to force everyone else to accept your interpretation of the elephant, you are trying to force us all to pay for its upkeep.

And the article you site ad infinitum begins with those same people saying that they do NOT know if the climate changes that are occurring have piss-all to do with Man’s activities. It’s not until near the end that a RETIRED guy makes that claim.

I will also point out AGAIN that the person in charge of our military is the President. Our current President is most certainly pushing the AGW agenda.

Your assertion is that a handful of people in the military means a totality. By your logic, since you support Obama, you are anti-Semitic, pro-sharia, pro-communism, pro-abortion, anti-military, anti-free market, anti-free speech, and a racist, since he has appointed people in his cabinet, his czars, and other various positions that hold these positions.

I will also remind you AGAIN that there is a difference between AGW and actual climate change. Is the climate changing? Of course. That’s what it does. It’s been changing since the planet first formed, and it will continue changing until we’re engulfed by the sun. Is Man to blame? Doubtful, given that humans have only been around for a fraction of the Earth’s existence, and only industrialized for a fraction of that.

* – ten thousand degrees FAHRENHEIT, not Celsius. I’m not trying to be absurd here and discuss what would happen if the world temps increased 10k deg C. Although I will offer a few predictions, should such a horrible thing come to pass. Ice cream will be a thing of the past. Dogs and cats will shack up together, but not marry, although bills will be passed to allow dog/cat marriage. Air conditioners will be declared anathema, though politicians will be able to use them as long as they pray to the Al Gore statues.