Of course they would, and did.  Democrats do it too.  That's what politicians do, unfortunately.  But lookat the CBO study: by their own admission it doesn't consider GDP decreases and job losses, a large part of the cost of the insane Waxman-Markey bill.

Floods and lakes drying up happen all the time.

Hurricane strength has been decreasing on average:

For good measure, tornado strength has also declined:

Desertification has nothing to do with global warming; it's caused by poor land use practices that lead to erosion.

Antarctic ice is at or near record highs.  I think you mean ice shelves breaking off, which happens as they grow and break off into the ocean.  This is not a new phenomenon and is not caused by global warming (how could it be when temperatures are below freezing in the area?).  Try here:  http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25648336-30417,00.html

Here is a graph of Antarctic ice extent to show what I mean:

^ That's interesting stuff. The Arctic ice is shrinking while the Antarctic ice is increasing (and seems to be much more volatile).

As for hurricanes, I thought the problem was that they were fewer in number, but they ones that we got were more damaging. It's better to have lots of weak ones than several monsters, right?

Yes, but there is evidence that solar flares have been factors in these storms.

The conventional thinking is that warmer waters increase the storms (and thats true), but why does the additional heat have to come from below the storm? Additional heat hitting the top of the storm could do the same thing.

At the times of our largest hurricanes, we had lots of solar activity.

The ice is fascinating to watch.  It should tell you that you're not getting the full picture if you consider that, as all the media was hyping the "lowest-ever" ice extent for the Arctic in 2007 (remember, this has only been measured accurately since 1979), you saw no articles even mention that the Antarctic ice extent was the highest ever recorded that very same year.  The Arctic ice last year increased 9% and the Antarctic ice decreased slightly from its record high.  But again, we have been measuring these things for such a short period of time it's extemely difficult to draw meaningful conclusions.  Thirty years is nothing at all on a geologic time scale, not even a blink.

I'm not as familiar with hurricanes other than the raw numbers.  There has been more damage in recent years from them, but remember that more people are living on the coasts now so there is more and more to destroy.  Hurricanes are highly variable in terms of numbers and intensity, so it's also something where it's very difficult to derive a pattern.  I've heard that ocean current patterns cause a 20- or 30-year cycle for hurricanes.  Also heard that global warming would increase their intensity.  However, 3,000 buoys launched in 2003 have shown a decrease in ocean heat content, so I'm having a hard time seeing how this fits into that theory:

From what I understand I would have to say you're wrong here. The sheer quantity of thermal energy held in water is massive compared to the atmosphere above it. There simply isn't enough energy for the storm to be powered from the atmosphere or the sun.

Wall Street Journal is mainstream...yeah right...its a right wing rag

We don't know for sure that it does not contribute. Several years back the northern east coast of the US and Canada lost power. Millions of people.

The reason was a massive solar flair hit the earth at that time, and the ground could not absorb enough energy, so it went into the lines and overloaded the system.

If you had asked a scientist before that happened if it was possible, almost all of them would have said no.

This is just a small example of why I hate this legislation. We know far less then we think we know. Trying to change the world on something as unproven as man made global warming is just crazy.

@Avinash, Every newspaper source here is from Rupert Murdoch, owner of News corporation, the largest media empire in the world and a right wing empire. He owns Fox News, thats all you need to know.

The energies involved in a hurricaine are massive, you simply could not get that energy from anywhere bar warm/tropical ocean water because water itself has such a high heat capacity. Solar irradiance is miniscule next to the sheer quantity of energy being sucked from the water itself.

I don't really know the specifics of the solar flare which caused the magnetic storm in the northern hemisphere, im a southerner you see?

I don't disagree with your position on the climate in general though. I think there are far more pressing matters such as water quality which are being neglected in favour of something which needs more study and less action. I personally don't understand why they haven't built a couple of massive computer systems the likes of which the world has never seen before to you know... understand the issues better or something.