The problem with the global warming argument is that the connection between man-made global warming can be seen as tentative at best.

The issues of global warming and energy consumption are often confused or cross-referenced, leading to criticism. Al Gore clearly sides with those who believe the current warming trend is man-made, but many do not draw the same conclusion based on the archeological evidence.

The real problem is that, although the method may be questionable, the crux of what Gore says is right - we *should* consume less, and we should tackle this issue with urgency, if not for global warming then for the fact that we're dangerously close to the point where the resources we use are less plentiful.

For a real giggle, look out for those who justify composting household refuse as a step towards reduction of greenhouse gases. Obviously didn't do chemistry at school.

→ Posted by: Mo at March 23, 2007 12:45 PM

I'm looking forward to Dr Who, but Torchwood has made me wary of poisoned wells...

→ Posted by: Tom Reynolds at March 23, 2007 4:39 PM

I still don't get how everyone loves Doctor Who. I love a lot of television but I just can't stand Doctor Who or Torchwood which is just cliché ridden, predictable, overacted bad television. I get how its science fiction, and that’s good because we never do science fiction, so for a British based science fiction show it’s probably good. Still that’s like saying that The Bill and Casualty are both good for British based crime/medical shows.

Think, please, for one second about Homicide or ER. Now think of Galactica. I rest my case. I don't get it.

→ Posted by: Tony at March 23, 2007 5:18 PM

To Mo - seriously, though, is this true? I mean, sure it's not necessarily going to be conclusive - there are things that are going to be very difficult to prove conclusively and correlation is always dubious evidence. But having said that, when it's such a hot button issue and such an enormous proportion of the scientific establishment who have examined it agree with it, then surely—while one must accept the possibility of error—it's irresponsible to make it seem like quite such a sketchy concept based on unstable evidence?

→ Posted by: Tom Coates at March 24, 2007 8:38 PM

There is doubt over whether an enormous proportion of the scientific establishment have actually reached concensus, or have even been exposed to the supporting evidence in full.

I'm not sure this is the right forum for such things, so I'll probably grind on about it elsewhere.

→ Posted by: Mo at March 27, 2007 10:08 PM

I think Mo's point is very well made- the effect of human resource usage, specifically cardon, but also the release of other gases that have a powerful chemical effect on the atmosphere is very very difficult to conclusively prove. In addition, the archeological record of climate change shows that it sometimes 'just happens'- sea levels have , over very very long periods of time, been far higher and far lower, and the temperatures over the previous glacial periods may have flipped in startling short periods (hundreds of years!).

What this means is that tacking together better resource husbandry and climate change is a challengable proposition. Aubrey Manning made a series called 'Earth Story' for the BBC I think that explored much of this archeological evidence for previous climate change.

Personnally I think we should be cutting back on resource usage, and that Gore's objectives are spot on. I just worry that he's using arguments that are powerful, but potentially fragile.

→ Posted by: ant at March 30, 2007 5:33 PM