Why Some of Us Will Never Agree

[Total_Blender]

There are a lot of scientists that do not believe the current administration's position. Here is an article on it:
http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2009/01/12/22506/

Happer is not a climate scientist, his fields are optics, spectroscopy, and radiation. As I understand it, most of the scientists on that list are not climate scientists... they work in other disciplines.

If anything the fact that it would take 1,000 years for the Earth to revert to it earlier level of Co2 should give us pause and be an indicator that we should work to decrease our output of Co2. Whether it is manmade or not, if its not going anywhere we probably shouldn't push our luck by adding to what occurs naturally. From your article:

Geoengineering to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere was not considered in the study. “Ideas about taking the carbon dioxide away after the world puts it in have been proposed, but right now those are very speculative,” said Solomon.

So some sort of engineering feat to remove the carbon may be a recourse in the future, if it really gets that bad. I suppose once we have nanotechnology and such such a thing might be more plausible.

The Fox article I will disregard because they only present the conservative side of the story. They didn't speak to the scientists behind the IPCC study, or anyone at the IPCC. The fact that the numbers came from a study not related to climate change does not necessarily mean that they are wrong, or that they are somehow not relevant to the topics presented in the study.

"up to 40 percent of the Amazonian forests could react drastically to even a slight reduction in precipitation" -- highlighting the threat climate change poses to the Earth. The report goes on to say that "it is more probable that forests will be replaced by ecosystems ... such as tropical savannas."

Fox didn't say this was wrong, they just said that it came from a study unrelated to global warming. However, the sharing of data between disciplines is one of the cornerstones of the Scientific Method. Data complied on how forests react to drops in precipitation would be equally useful for studies on the impact of climate change and on the impact of forest fires.