The AGW Debate

Why is this debate about beliefs? Anthropogenic global warming is either true or not, and science — not belief — should be the judge. What the public 'believes' is largely irrelevant to the underlying fact.

Scale is routinely ignored in these debates: even if AGW is real, almost nothing we can do voluntarily will change the outcome in any reasonable time frame. The real solution, if one comes, will likely arrive from some unexpected tangent of human ingenuity. The future has never been a linear projection of the past.

(This is my framing from 2009; the role of human activity in warming is well established in the scientific literature.)