ttbn,

thank you, some more pieces of "actual" and real truth, good or bad it is never-the-less a truth.
It fits with other comments which form part of this jig-saw puzzle titled; GW or CC.
As I have said before I am sitting on the fence, with one foot leaning towards the GW and CC thing being a bit of a stretch, which I can only concede to when ALL of the science is in agreeance.
I trust in most systems, in this case I use the example of a jury, (the scientists) deliberating over the outcome of a man charged with murder.
The jury must come to a UNANIMOUS decision.
Not a Majority decision.
The similarity is ironic, and so it is that the scientists, (jurors) must all agree, because if there is one who does not agree, this issue, like sending a man to his death, is a life changing and very serious one, if it ends up being as catstrophic as some would let us believe.
And so it is that as much as some believe that in life we can never get consensus, in this case, I say we MUST.

ALTRAV, you have it backwards: it is failing to act that is akin to sending a man to his death; the costs of decarbonising the economy are trivial compared to the costs of dealing with the effects of global warming if we ignore the problem.

There is a strong consensus among scientists, though it's not universal and nor should it need to be. Scientists are not a jury, and skepticism is a desirable quality for scientists. But the vast majority of the people with more than a superficial understanding of the science find the evidence overwhelming. And those who try to make the opposite case have a clear tendency to resort to deception and obfuscation.

______________________________________________________________________________________

individual,
I see you still haven't answered my question. Was my surmise correct?

To Aidan.

Climate change doesn't matter as much as localized pollution. And it doesn't have as much support for actual effects in the word as localized pollution. Find ways to reduce smog in cities and people will breath easier. Look for ways to address the water needs of both big cities and poor countries (as well as the water needs for farmers and the natural enviornment around you). Do these things and you can be a real environmentalist. Not a person caught up in the roaming lies and misdirection of climite change and global warming. There are things you can do, or can support without having to support a lie along with it.

Not_Now.Soon,

Climate change activists don't give a crap about localized pollution.
- That's somebody else's job -

http://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/climate-change/a-climate-change-photo-that-has-been-shared-more-than-34000-times-has-outraged-facebook-users/news-story/2271ff0fd36fe1be9282b31be1de3977

Not_Now.Soon
It's not either-or, and many of the same actions with reduce both localised pollution and greenhouse gas emissions.

As a civil engineer and the son of a hydrologist, I'm well aware of the problems of supplying water, as well as many of the solutions (and they're not what Alan B. thinks they are).

Unlike most people on this board, I'm not "caught up in the roaming lies and misdirection of climite change and global warming". I stick with the truth – no matter how much the deniers go around with their eyes shut and their ears blocked, accusing the truth tellers of lying!

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Armchair,
Try reading the story you linked to in its entirety: you'll ind it refutes your claim!

To be a civil engineer Aidan you must have a reasonable level of math. How come you have never applied it to the Global warming scam? If you had you would have disproved it completely just as I did when I looked at t it critically.

You would have found that CO2 can not produce more than 3/4 of a degree F to the planet's temperature, even if tripled. To do more requires dreamed up tipping points, that are just that, dreamed up to cover the truth.

Like you I simply believed what the scammer talked about, until climate gate. There was just too much smoke, [& mirrors} revealed in the emails to be true. It only took a couple of weeks to see right through the scam. Why haven't you put the effort in to find the truth?