The whole climate change discussion strikes me as unbalanced. I have a hard time believing what is screamed by the media because they are parroting the environmental activists groups and, of course, Al Gore. The environmentalists are more anti-corporation and anti-free markets than they are truly environmental. The case of biofuels fairly proves that. So, it is virtually impossible to trust anything that is said by those groups or Al Gore (Manbearpig). These people provide the definition of "hidden agenda." But, they have had a stranglehold on the discussion to this point.
John Coleman, the founder of the Weather Channel, has some strong words on the subject. This article is well worth reading so that you get some balance on the subject. His point is that CO2 is not the enemy, and the "science" proving that it is, is highly questionable.
It seems to me that a wait and see attitude is by far the better response than destroying the world's economy in a silly effort to reduce carbon by 10% or 20% or whatever the number is today. The planet has cooled over the last ten years but the warming fanatics think we should ignore that; One even commented that the cooling was masking the warming trend. (That individual should get the Orwell award for double speak.) It is about the same as saying that the high gas prices are masking a downward trend in the price of fuel.
Talk about bitterly clinging!