I wrote about Al Gore's energy consumption a few days ago. Now, the Wall Street Journal has taken a turn on their editorial page.
Mr. Gore is rich and fortunate enough to be able to afford the "carbon offset" for his energy indulgences. The middle-class parents who need a gas-guzzling SUV to haul the kids to soccer practice might not be so lucky. They might even settle for an unheated pool.
I am unaccustomed to agreeing with, or blazing the path for, the Journal's editorial board. It's arguably the most politically conservative daily editorial page in the country.
Of course that's a large part of the problem with the whole human induced global warming debate. It has become a conservative vs. liberal bout - a political argument.
It's really a scientific debate. Why has that been lost in all the noise?
I believe the scientific debate has been over for some time.
I've only seen a few of your blog entries, and am not clear about your position on global warming, but it seems like you have a bit of sckepticism towards the potential dangers of the issue. I have to disagree based on the scientific community.
Now, the Wallstreet Journal have an obvious stake in supporting the Exxons of the world (and their junk science), but I believe it's short-sighted. Emissions controls would make American car manufactures competitive in countries that have tougher emissions than our current restrictions (as an example).
Keep up the good work Geoff. I disagree with you here (I think), but appreciate your blog and weather forecasts.