Here's an article with differing opinions on warming...
http://www.msnbc.com/news/481170.asp One scientist says...“I’m very cautious to make any conclusion based on five more years of data,” he said. “Give me 50 years, and we might be able to say something conclusive. Five years is simply too short a time frame.”
I understand that science tends not to regard anything as fact until there is no doubt based on evidence. In my opinion, it seems like quite a gamble to wait until climate change progresses to the point where it's obviously real and caused by us before attempting to curtail it. How long would it take to reverse the effects of 200 years of manmade contributions to this event? I think that reasonable evidence is enough to justify efforts to curtail greenhouse gasses. I am not an alarmist, but there's only on planet earth, fer cryin' out loud...why take the chance if we do not need to.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
