The AGW Debate Rages On - Weekend Pundit

I've come across quite a few actual scientists involved with climate studies in related fields, and almost all of them agree that there's a good reason to remain skeptical. It comes down to this: the AGW camp hasn't done its homework. There are too many factors they've chosen to ignore that have an even greater effect on Earth's climate than any carbon dioxide generated by we puny humans. Many of the models being used as proof are one dimensional, giving far too much weight to carbon dioxide as the driver of global temperatures. None of the models being used have been able to predict what the climate would be like in the 70's, 80's, or 90's using valid data from the late 1880's forward (the models didn't even come close). So how can anyone give any credence to predictions about climate in 2100 using those same models?

So the debate rages on and is gathering steam.

Climate Progress » Blog Archive » Signs of global warming are everywhere, but if the New York Times can’t tell the story (twice!), how will the public hear it?

The signs of global warming are everywhere. Coming back from my Vail conference to Denver, the driver pointed out to me the shocking devastation the state is now experiencing from the pine beetle, devastation anyone who lives in the West can see.
...
The so-called paper of record ran its second major story in less than a year on the country’s most infamous climate-driven pest, “Beetles Add New Dynamic to Forest Fire Control Efforts” by Kirk Johnson. And like the early piece, “Bark Beetles Kill Millions of Acres of Trees in West,” by Jim Robbins, it’s a great story, other than neglecting to mention climate change.

[Do Obama's advisors now realize that Al Gore Warming is a hoax?]

Judging by emails and comments, many progressives and enviros seem to be under the misimpression that a much tougher climate bill was politically possible. I myself was under that misimpression for a while.

Now, in fairness to myself (and others), one serious scenario does exist for a tougher climate bill being politically possible — but that involves a very hands-on Obama, which so far hasn’t been his style for passing legislation (see “Obama can get a better climate bill in 2010“). Also, his advisors are almost certainly telling him to soft-pedal climate science — a serious mistake, since it essentially gives the deniers free reign to shape half of the debate. I will blog on that shortly.