Al Gore and others dismiss any arguments against the current consensus that global warming is man-made by citing the heretics links with the fossil fuel lobbies. I can understand why Al Gore accepts no dissent of his view – he is on a mission and to deign to address the arguments of the dissenters is to introduce doubt. What I cannot understand is that intellgient people that I meet are so perturbed by any challenge to their world-view, that they latch on to any excuse they can to dismiss the arguments of those that may challenge their views. This is simplistic, lazy and dangerous.
Those that disagree or question the consensus that has now formed around this issue are generally treated as heretics – worse, their arguments are ignored becuase they have been shown to be financed by the “fossil fuel” lobby.
Let us assume that the evidence for global warming is not conclusive. Let us also assume that the evidence that it is created or accelerated by man’s influence on the planet is also inconclusive. If this was the case then I would still suport the search for non-fossil fuel alternatives and for the man to use energy more efficiently subject to one important caveat. The reasons for supporting energy effiicency and the search for non-fossil fuel based energy are as follows:
1) It is better to be safe than sorry – i.e. let’s not wait for conclusiveevidence and find out that it is too late.
2) Oil, gas and coal will run out and alternatives may take a century or more to be implemented
My one caveat is that our policies should avoid any negative impact on the developing countries where electricity for home and industry only behind food in the order of importance.