2,000 posts, and what did we establish?
That the debate is not nearly as over as it is claimed to be... and if the debate IS over, it's NOT in the favor of the alarmists.
Yes, the earth HAS been on a 150 year or so warming trend overall.
and human activity is accelerating it.
At least you worded that in such a way that concedes that the earth would have warmed regardless of human activity... But, really only to the degree that the less then 0.5 degree change in that time has been caused by changes in CO2 levels.
Every scientific organization in the world is on board with that.
Which could simply be their 'official statements', as a way to make sure that they don't shake the boat, so to speak.
Or that they are on board with the fact that Co2 has a warming influence, while not necessarily being in line with Pachaury and the rest of the IPCC...
I haven't examined the statements of every single one and seen them all defend that position... so, this is honest questions and relates to your next point.
Of course, there is the possibility that they might all be in a giant conspiracy to keep government funding flowing by telling the governments of the world what they want to hear.
Stop calling it a 'giant conspiracy'... the FACT is that these people that you would call 'conspirators' have written SEVERAL books about the true nature of the AGW alarmist agenda... AND IF YOU READ their books you will understand that they intend to USE the hype because they have a LEGITIMATE BELIEF that their plan is 'what is best for all'... JUST LIKE a doctor cutting off your leg is doing so because he LEGITIMATELY BELIEVES that it's in the best interest of all that the limb be removed.
Conspiracy REQUIRES that it be a nefarious intention, and this is NOT a demonstrable position... WHAT IS demonstrable is what these people have as "solutions"... "solutions" to which I object morally, intellectually, and selfishly, because of the implications of what these solutions entail...
That said, IF YOU JUST hear the 'solutions' then YES you'll have to call it 'conspiracy', because 'nobody would want to do anything like that', BUT we can ONLY engage in a debate on these issues when we finally come to accept the totality of the facts.
Which is plausible if you believe that all of the governments of the world are the same.
It is tropism. There's 195 countries in the world, and the vast majority of them are run by dictators. There are only so many ways that a dictator will act... and if it's not from the outset, then it occurs later as the regime becomes more corrupt with power.
So, can we now start to talk about what is really controversial:
Will global warming be a disaster, will it be a boon, or a mixture of both?
MOSTLY a boon, but there's ALWAYS disasters, they are always tragic, but there's nothing that can be done to avoid that. The only reason that it might seem that there are more disaster is because news has spread to a global medium with the capacity to report world evens within minutes.
The fact is that crops can be shifted to adjust for climate, brings about longer growing seasons for food, etc.. so, warmer climate is preferable. Unless we're talking about scorched earth hot, but that would be as bad as the earth becoming a spinning ball of ice.
Could we actually do something about it if we had the will?
No. Humans only have a VERY LIMITED capacity to change the environment through CO2.
If, however, you're talking about environmental DAMAGE and not specifically climate temperature, then Yes, there IS the capacity to do stuff to fix many problems going on.
A better question : Is our will to to become more environmentally responsible while maintaining our standards of living MORE then the will of the global 'elites' to create a post-industrial world ??
To your question, I would have to maintain a level of pessimism because of the extent of the corruption involved in the AGW Alarmist camp... which has been more public then the corruption of those not buying into the alarmism.
(Those are positions 3 and 4 from the previous 2,000 posts. Positions 1 and 2 are already settled).
Position 1 : the earth has been on a warming trend for the past 150 or so years... yes, that's not really debated...
Position 2 : Not the way you phrased it.
