Clearly there is dissent but as to which group is correct remains to be seen. Either way in the next 20 to 50 years we may likely have a clearer picture of the trend. If no action is taken re CO2 and severe climate change does not occur then we will likely brand the Gore camp as having been wrong. If no action is taken and the world experiences major climatic trauma then we will likely say we should have listened to the global warming proponents. If action is taken as is being currently contemplated and in 20-50 years there is no significant deterioration in climate then it is likely it will be said the action taken is working. Of course that does not mean that the action taken actually caused the no change but some will infer that is the case. If action is taken and climates still deteriorate some will say this was because insufficient action was taken whereas others will say it was because the CO2 was never the cause.
So for the ordinary person who needs to decide which way the issue may impact on their vote its a bit of a dilemma. In the end we make a decision and the suits in Parliament use their government perogative to take a particular approach and we live with it. Given the divergence of opinion on the subject many of us will have doubts either way. Time will tell its story and you never know something might come from left field and a mighty meteor might make the debate superflous when the earth is blown to smithereens. Even that possibility will be open to debate with some saying the earth has been here for millions of years so unlikely it will be destroyed by a galactic collision, whereas others might say because millions of years have passed the odds for a collision have shortened.
So where are we? tired very very tired, so tired.Tired. Goodnight all zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
