a mexican el pasoan?

So from that I have no motivation to prosper.

When Obama says he'll bring science to the forefront, does that mean he's going to recognize the 650 scientists who dissent from the global warming opinion? I have a feeling they'll be ignored and more and more money will get poured into projects which do nothing but line someone's pockets.

People need to keep up with the trends... the fad is that we are now in an ice age. Good thing we know how to heat the earth up with fossil fuels...

Who are these 650 scientist? I'm a research scientist, but not an environmental one... You gotta be specific.

It is the senate minority report and lists the scientists (a lot of atmospheric and geology research scientists). Some say the Senator has an agenda (really?!) but reading some of the scientists opinions, it's not that they necessarily disagree with global warming, it's that they say the dialogue is by no means over and that this is not a decided topic among the community.

I certain believe that the senate may have some sort of agenda, but it's not upto politics to bring these people to light. Science can be somewhat controversial with in it self, but generally, you need to have legitimate research to prove that you are right. If you provide rock solid proof that shows the opposite of climate change, other scientist will look into it too. I don't think it's Obama's position to recognize these people as he is not a climatologist. Instead other scientist who do research in this field should be the ones bringing these people to light. I agree with that the dialogue about global warming is not over, and there's certainly more to be learned about, which probably means that the government should provide more funding for climate research. To some degree, it is concerning as to how political people take these research, if you prove x causes y, some people will take it as x will cause a, b and c as well, when really that's just an unproven theory.

They all have their own runnings in it. Humans contribute a very small amount of carbon to the atmosphere and this can affect the weather. Both sides are hardlined and have abandon reason for their position. There is evidence both ways, but what concerns me is that we do need to reduce pollution and use alternative energy sources. Problem is that people use what i call stupid green. Smeltering Nickel for their hybrids....very bad for ecology, but not releasing a bunch of carbon. Solar Panels? They are very good where I live (southern Arizona) but totally wothless where they are hip to have (San Francisco and Seattle).

Its blatent denial on the right. And zealous stupidity on the left.

I think it just comes down to having the public more aware of what they are doing. If you want to use canvas bags for they are more ecologically friendly, but you drive a suv five minutes to the supermarket, maybe you should rethink the car instead of the canvas bag. If you refuse to use paper cups to drink coffee, but have lost several thermal mugs, maybe you should reconsider the paper cups. Perhaps san fran is not the best place to put a solar panel, but much of the US may be. Then you can see how much emission that can be saved if you had it at places that can make use of it and think of something else in san fran, like wind energy or tidal currents. That doesn't mean you should stop solar panel development. If nickel-cadmium batteries are damaging to the environment, maybe consider using lithium-ion batteries. If you don't want to import lithium, maybe try to fund studies on sodium-ion batteries. The point is to find a balance and not to stop research because one thing is not working out.

here's my take

i don't give a shit

this give my kids, and their kids, and their kids, etc., shit to work on in their lifetime. makes their generation be thinkers & innovators.

Yeah, but the government shouldn't be telling you that you can't drive that SUV to the supermarket.

The one technology that I've been involved in that I wish would take off is algae. The stuff grows like a weed when put in the right conditions (lots of sunlight) and it grows quickly.

I am not suggesting to stop research, my point is that the debate over climate change is not over even though a lot of people act like it is. My concern with the global warming claims and pushes are that they make it seem like non-"believers" are evil and out to kill the planet. I drive a fuel efficient car, I recycle, I have a compost pile and none of it in the name of "save the planet" but more in the name of, I like to save money, I think that throwing away plastic is stupid, and I like to grow my own food.

Well, the government probably can't directly tell you not to drive SUV, chances are they won't since it's not practical. What government can do are through other policies like emission standards, factory CO2 output, and cleaner/alternative fuel which I believe is the right way to go especially if you have trusted advisers who are in-the-know for this area. I think it's great that you recycle and compost (if I had a back yard I'd compost too), but unless there's a change in public attitude it's very hard to get enough people to recycle to make a difference. I live in a fairly liberal town where people practically can recycle everything they own, but even here it's hard to do. Plus you don't really know what you're doing is actually for the better for the worse. You might think that canvas bags are better than plastic bags, but what makes it true besides a gut feeling? What the energy and CO2 emission cost for 1 canvas bag is the same as 10,000 plastic bags? What if you own 5 canvas bags? What if you recycle plastic bags (which I don't know why people don't insist you recycle them since they're pretty easy to melt down and re-extrude). I personally don't know these things if someone doesn't tell me.

Well, from what I hear from people who are involved with climate research, they truly believe what we're doing is killing the planet. I think their frustration mostly reside in people's lack of information on this subject. Granted, I don't really think any average joes out there is gonna pick up a Science paper and read about the CO2 levels in melting north atlantic ice capsules, chances are I won't either. And they sit in seminar after seminar listening about new findings in climate change research that it is dramatically changing the environment on this earth, to only have people who know not a whole lot of about climate claim that they're leftist and that what they believe in is bullshit. I can understand their frustration. If people who don't know much about my research and told me that it's not real, I'd be very frustrated too. Anyway, that's beside the point.

BTW (aww)

Good thing you recycled that cat. Its cuteness was starting to melt my heart. And that is bad for the enviroment.

All this is more the reason to not care & pass it to future generations.

Well that case, I will melt all you all's hearts.