Unfortunately, the debate has become highly political. To avert the risk we need to get some broad-based support, to capture public imagination. So we have to offer up some scary scenarios make some simplified dramatic statements and little mention of any doubts one might have. So much for genuine scientific discourse. Past polls have found that most climatologists do not believe human-induced warming has occurred.
Disputes begin over data collection and temperature trends.
The best evidence suggests far less warming so far this century than predicted by the models. Thus, there is good reason to avoid burdensome treaty commitments. Since the United States is already one of the globe's most efficient energy consumers, massive emission cutbacks would mean fewer jobs, less production, and a lower standard of living. It obviously matters whether environmental activists are choosing effectiveness or honesty when making their claims. It is not enough to delay the agreement's compliance date as proposed by Mr. Clinton.