Gore might wrap himself in the mantle of science, but he is not a scientist. He belongs to a class of people -- politicians -- least trusted by the public.

There is no dispute about climate constantly changing. This is a given. The question politicians need to answer, if they have any clue, is one the scientist and former editor of the Journal of Biogeography, Philip Stott, recently asked in a public debate held in New York City: "What climate are you actually aiming to produce and when we get there won't it change anyway?"
Consensus, as Gore insists, is not the basis by which closure is brought to scientific discussions. Science is about the search for answers to natural phenomena and its progress is made through scrutiny and tests of falsification, and not consensus imposed by extraneous considerations.
The public, being generally wary of politicians, needs to question those who will impose a policy based on claims of science when scientists cannot predict in advance, for instance, how many hurricanes will strike in a given year -- a year that would be music to the ears of the insurance industry.

China and India will at their current pace use more fossil fuels in the next 3 years then the entire industrial world did in the past 125 years. Is there some ulterior motive why Marc D. Davidson picked on the U.S. and NOT China or INDIA? The Kyoto Protocol is a joke, one hundred and thirty-seven (137) developing countries have ratified the protocol, including Brazil, China and India, but have no obligation beyond monitoring and reporting emissions. Notice THEY the worst offenders DON'T have to cut anything. China trades or sells it's carbon emissions with Costa Rica which has virtually none, so just where did China cut it's emissions? It's like I'm fat and need to loose weight, I give my cousin $50 to loose weight, he drops 20 pounds, is $50 richer and I'm still fat. No change in the environment.

After all, in 1619 it was the Dutch who introduced slavery to colonial America at the Jamestown colony in Virginia. The Dutch never did abolish indentured servitude......the Nazis did it for them in 1940.

I foresee a new thought-crime: Global Warming Denial. Jail and political/environmental re-education upon conviction.

Americans aren't stupid enough to fall for the Kyoto treaty's transfer of wealth scheme. It's that simple.

The whole Global Warming scam is the scientifically unsubstantiated new religion of lame lefties who's muddled thinking is: if it FEELS right it must be right. This stupid humanities professor and his lefty minions feel their way through life rather than use logic and reason.

What does this have to say about countries that are currently dependent upon and/or sell fossil fuels AND retain slavery?

The people of the US will make a deal with the University of Amsterdam, the people of Holland, the people of Europe, or whoever, if they will take Algore, they can have him and his nobel prize, oscar, etc. provided they take all the hot air that goes along with him.

This is a classic case of drawing a moral equivalence where none exists. Despite all the proclamations from the left that the issue is settled, that is not true. There are many knowledgeable climatologist who are not in agreement on the matter of anthropologically induced global warming. To therefore determine the morality of this matter a priori is simply false. To simply abandon fossil fuels in favor of some other power source, or to go to no power source with the attendant cutbacks in industry and employment, both have moral implications and are thus not morally neutral either.

This is what is called a "cheap shot."

"Marc D. Davidson at the University’s Philosophy Department"

More proof that the debate is controlled by social "scientists" rather than chemists and biologists.

If exploration is the main target, the author is right.

...then European Socialists think like Aristocrats?