Just came across this news article.
Danish scientist: Global warming is a myth
COPENHAGEN, Denmark, March 15 (UPI) -- A Danish scientist said the idea of a "global temperature" and global warming is more political than scientific.

University of Copenhagen Professor Bjarne Andresen has analyzed the topic in collaboration with Canadian Professors Christopher Essex from the University of Western Ontario and Ross McKitrick of the University of Guelph.

It is generally assumed the Earth's atmosphere and oceans have grown warmer during the recent 50 years because of an upward trend in the so-called global temperature, which is the result of complex calculations and averaging of air temperature measurements taken around the world.

"It is impossible to talk about a single temperature for something as complicated as the climate of Earth," said Andresen, an expert on thermodynamics. "A temperature can be defined only for a homogeneous system. Furthermore, the climate is not governed by a single temperature. Rather, differences of temperatures drive the processes and create the storms, sea currents, thunder, etc. which make up the climate".

He says the currently used method of determining the global temperature -- and any conclusion drawn from it -- is more political than scientific.

The argument is presented in the Journal of Non-Equilibrium Thermodynamics.

Jake; you continue to speak from the point of view of the Gore movie. Greenland was WAY warmer in the middle ages, as I said before, and the ice cap didn't all melt. It is not proven that extremely bad things will happen if the earth gets warmer, it is not proven that the earth is getting seriously warmer, and it is definitely not proven that mankind can do anything about it if it is getting warmer.

Bullswan; debate is rhetoric. I'm trying to insert some economic reality into a point of view generated by an hysterical documentary.

Jake; if it is all big oil's fault and we are their victims as you indicate, then we should all run to the "greenies" to save us and tell us how to live? You say "cars are still going to sell if they get 50 mpg." Some do now and they don't sell. Should we not let the free market work? Many don't think we should because we are not smart enough to know what is good for us. Let's let some elite group decide how we should live? That has been tried for ages and always seems to come up bad for the average citizen. Here is a quote from C.S. Lewis, one of those "reborn Christian bubbas" although as a professor of Medieval Languages at Oxford, I doubt he was very bubba-like.

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."

Words of wisdom. Certainly you are correct that we should all try to live in a more environmentally friendly fashion; no one would seriously dispute the wisdom of that point of view. And raising everyone's conciousness regarding such a lifestyle is good. But I don't think we should all forget the cost/benefit analyses we make, both as individuals and as a society in our decisions.

David
A-Cat and big cat