Let me summarize. If you look at all the data, (and not just the links he provides.) many studies point to the overall climate change on the side of warming. And yes, there are the contrary depending on
what variables are held constant. A healthy practice of science requires skepticism even amongst themselves. But what is not understood,
is how much mankind contributes to the overall global warming That is the essence. This, most global scientists agree.(They do not make blanket statements about the human contribution to green house effects.) unlike the media. And I do think the media is hysterical about the latter issue.
However, since models predicting climate behavior are an imperfect science I am not going to argue the merits of emission controls based on global warming. Instead, there is a more substantial method and reason for emission control wether it relates to global warming or not.
Since epidimeology is a more exact science global warming models currently being utilized I propose medical epidimeology data as a more concrete method of advancing the cause of the Kyoto Treaty.
It is very, very easy to track the number of hospital admissions, emergency room visits for asthma exacerbations and other respiratory illnessess and show a direct correlation with the level of ozone for that day or week.
Asthma has increased in prevalence by fifty percent.... the one disease that has increased not only in prevalance but also mortality so it is a serious subject among medical professionals.
Study after study show that air pollutants exacerbate asthma but there are more and more studies showing that it causes asthma
see
http://www.sinusnews.com/Articles2/...one-asthma.html
This is one of many studies.
Who suffers? Children who have to breath in fifty percent more air than adults per body mass. These studies show counties with higher ozone levels have three times more newly diagnosed asthmatics, more school absences due to respiratory problems, etc. etc.
The EPA has been good about reducing overall air pollutants, skeptics may ask why the increased rate in asthma? Once again, the answer depends on the question asked. The EPA bases its measurements on relatively large particle size airborne pollutants which are measured and thus define air quality index. Experts state that these air quality measurements do not measure the real and much more dangerous smaller particle pollutants which are comprising more and more of the emissions (? due to different fossil fuel burning technology? I don't know since I am not an expert in this stuff.)
Thus, some may not care about global warming or fuel supply, but its effect on medical expenditure usage, on increasing the prevelance of the one disease that has also increased in mortality (compared to strokes, heart attacks, all cancers etc.), the physical damage to the most vulnerable segment of our society, children... makes emissiion control a public health problem. ( I have only discussed asthma and did not even go into the exacerbations and increased death or hospitalizations of those with other lung diseases affected by air pollution.)
The Kyoto treaty is not just an environmental issue, it is a medical issue for many doctors and a public health crisis around the globe.