As Irene carves an extra large swath of destruction up the eastern seaboard and folks recover from epic disasters all over the world,
why do we allow the debate to be whether or not we accept responsibility for global warming?? Our politicians stand around like a bunch of children who insist they don't have to clean it up, and the people they represent shouldn't, because they didn't "do it". Present them of scientific evidence of its veracity, and they claim that it is a plot and a scheme...
to do what?? What sense does it make to believe a bunch of nefarious scientists are manipulating the data... to do what?? Get some grants? Make someone look bad? Personal notoriety? Oh, wait, that sounds more like your average politician than the scientist-with-no-name-at-mischief-in-his-lab. What is their motivation for "manipulating" this data? There would have to be something to gain to encourage manipulation, and there is clearly far more personal gain in denying it than decrying it.
I don't want to live on a polluted planet. I don't want to bake at 108 degrees for days on end. I don't want to die in a mega-storm, or starve when one destroys our crops. Whether it's "natural" or "man-made", can't we just respond to the very real threat instead of allowing cow-towing to money interests and start trying to save our own collective asses already??
Whether on the right or the left side of this issue, I ask... is whether or not it's "real" something we want to take a chance on, any of us? Because if it is... we will sorely regret that denial. In the end, it won't matter what political affiliation we are, or whether or not we ascribe to the fundamental nature of the constitution, or if we believe in abortion rights or civil rights or the divine right of some people to have those things over others. In the end, our frail human selves all go the same way, and we all die just the same.