of "following the money" when investigating complex situations. In the context of our argument, this was clearly meant to apply to the financial affairs of governments and large corporations, but you chose to obfuscate the point by alleging that I was attacking young hard-workng scientists, working long hours. That was pathetic. And very dishonest. With your political persuasions, I would have thought that the current largest transfer of wealth in history from the working classes to large corporations -- which is what carbon cap-and-trade is -- would be a matter of active concern. It is, to me. manacker Peter, Let me respond to yet another petard on your part: "Millions of people die annually from particulate pollution from the combustion of coal and oil." No, Peter. Check your facts. The "millions" (2 million as estimated by the WHO) die from particulates resulting from burning firewood inside their homes for cooking, because they do not have access to gas or electrical current for cooking, and (according to WHO) another 2 million die annually because they do not have access to clean drinking water (which requires electrical power to treat and distribute, as is done in the developed world). This is the hypocrisy of the "rich man's" myopic AGW fixation. AGW-aficionados suggest we spend trillions to combat a non-existent global warming threat (by making a lot of already wealthy individuals and corporations even richer and a bunch of politicians and bureaucrats more powerful) instead of investing these same trillions to ensure that