1. Yes
2. All (to my knowledge) credible (and even not-so-credible) climate scientists believe it to be happening.
3. They're a bit too politicized, and, as will be explained below, they suffer from some of the same delusions that many other environmentalists labor under.
4. Proponents: In general, I think they're horribly misguided. The vast majority of people who believe in AGW also believe that we ought to be doing something (within our current capabilities) to stop it, which, we are informed by almost all projections, would take a hell of a lot more than anything that's been proposed so far. Even Kyoto was essentially worthless as climate policy, and nobody was able to accept the economic damages associated with it. We need new technologies and novel solutions to the problem (see the south pole carbon elevator in the latest Economist).
Opponents: Wrong, but not dangerously so. In my experience, they generally just attack the idea as a way of interfering with current climate policy, which is a worthwhile goal, as I see it (see above). If no one were saying that we need to sacrifice mind-bogglingly huge portions of GDP in order to stop AGW, then almost no one would be actively opposing the theory.
Existing User Log In
New User Registration
Register for a free account to gain full access to the VGChartz Network and join our thriving community.
