This is the one debate guaranteed to provoke deep seated feelings on both sides of the camp.
For me, the recent politics overshadows the facts. The problem is that whilst there are surprisingly few facts to link man's specific activities directly to recent climate change, the one fact remaining true is that its happening.
This raises two issues in my mind. Firstly, there's far too much talk spawned by fanatical politicians (and yes, they're the fanaticists too) about us changing things through low carbon emissions, when the truth is that dveleoping countires will only pay lip service to do this and western governments will conveniently go on hiking "green" taxes.
Secondly its the arrogance of people, mostly scientists and politicians, who think that we are even capable of reversing, let alone understanding current trends.
I hear little of what we ought to be doing to prepare for climate change and all around me there are influencial public figures, politicians (damned) celebrities and the like all fiddling whilst Rome burns.
In the UK for example, where is the commitment to the Pitt Report, published a few years ago now, on flood prevention? I'll tell you...there is no committment, and certainly none funded from green taxes.
There is however a maddening surge towards green energy sources and whilst this may be an admirable goal, its ill thought out and more costly than we would would be told.
The whole debate for me is another sickening hypothesis with the "for" camp brainwashing the younger generation with half truths and political correctness, when our energies ought to be put towards a shift in agricultural policies, being more self sufficient in all areas, not just renewables, and preparing practical measures which in this country ought to be commitment to banning development in flood plains, a move to disintegrated urban drainage systems, greater recycling and sensible measures to reduce our heating and energy needs without all the knee-jerk b*llsh*t which is flavour of the day.
I think that most on the other side of the debate, often seen as fat-earthers (no offence to Linn fans!) are open to sensible dialogue and all would agree (unless particularly dumb) on the advantages of greater efficiency and enshrining sensible planning changes into statute, but so often our voice is drowned out by suedo scientific fanaticism and very humanist and arrogant thinking which says unless we do something now, we're all doomed. Yes lets do something but not in the vain of King Canute, more in the vain of sensible practical policies on preparation for the changes that are happening. There is to my understanding as much evidence to counteract the arguments of cause as there is to prove it, but thats a futile argument to have.
