Thanks for the WSJ article Blast. That will come in handy next month when I'll be subject to corporate "Sustainability" indoct..errr, training.

"...there is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition." That about says it all.

"But , Just because Fox News does a report about the theorys of a couple of scientists from Denmark doesn't really mean anything IMO. . "

And yet you accept without question an MSNBC report about the theories of a "couple of scientists" from England? (See the first post in the thread.) Do you not see the inconsistency here?

I don't know if the alleged "Global Warming" is caused by automobiles, volcanic activity, cosmic rays, or excessive monkey flatulance. But I am not going to just blindly accept that it is man-made without a lot of hard evidence carefully collected from seperate and (hopefully) unbiased sources

Again, there are other perfectly valid reasons to reduce human pollution that don't involve media driven scare tactics. Let's educate people about them.

This line gave me a chuckle: "...Greg Holland of the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colo., who argues that it must be global warming because he can't think of anything else." <img src="/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

As for the nay-sayers being a fraction of a percentage I would direct you to this site where over 17,000 scientists signed a petition saying human induced global warming is so much garbage web page