I’m kind of missing the thought process which dismisses Global Warming based upon ideology.
I’m no expert, but I can see and understand quantitative observations. The average temperature has been rising; the glaciers have been melting and the western snowpack has been disappearing.
These are simple observations that say nothing about WHY these things are occurring.
When you encounter someone who denies the fact of Global Warming before you even get to the question of the cause, you know you’ve met someone who is making his decision based upon ideology and not evidence.
These people are morons that should be ignored.
It may well be that the warming trends being observed are a short term aberration or part of a long term cycle that we can do little or nothing about. Even if it is due to human activity, it’s possible that curtailing those activities would result in a bigger catastrophe then letting it take its course.
These are all arguments that have been advanced by people who do not believe Global Warming is a big deal. I think they’re wrong, but I think we need to consider what they're saying. Unless of course the arguments are simply camouflage for ideology, but I don’t think this is true in most cases.
Personally I think that at least some of the warming trend is the result of human activities. I also think it’s possible to eliminate or reduce most of those activities without introducing an economic meltdown. As a matter of fact, Green Technology strikes me as a potential win-win economic bonanza.
Personally I have confidence that human ingenuity, not to mention greed, can overcome the problem. It strikes me that those who are fighting the hardest against the idea are those making big bucks with the current technologies and would rather not take the chance of getting their butts kicked by the emerging competition.
They’d rather endanger the planet, or at least a sizable part of the planet’s population, rather than re-compete even though they have all the advantages. I call that being a spineless coward.