Sense, Nonsense, and Not-Sense

Yes, as a scientist, I actually read the papers that establish links. (And HIV to AIDS has been scientifically proven, we've had at least three cases where a researcher working with HIV has suffered a needle stick, contracted and subsequently developed AIDS. Cholesterol to heart disease is a statistical link but climate models that link pollution to global warming don't even have that. We don't have thousands of similar planets with various levels of pollution to base a statistical model around.) Plus, I think that people should accept that global warming is actually happening, it's beyond dispute. This doesn't mean that I don't think that Gore went way overboard. I agree that people who don't think global warming is actually happening shouldn't get any facetime. It doesn't mean we have to resort to graphics of drowning polar bears.

Economic models don't predict the future, they measure costs that can be controlled and accounted for. If I choose to pay $10 for a movie ticket, it will cost me $10 today. If I choose to pay $10 instead to reduce my carbon footprint, I won't have $10 for a movie. (Oh, yeah, before you ask, I also managed to get straight A's in the half-dozen economics classes I took in college.) I'm not afraid of models that try to predict the future when we can control all the elements and all the relationships are established. I can predict that when I flip a switch that the light will turn on. But I don't agree with people who make exaggerated claims about the future when we have no evidence that shows such a theory can be extrapolated into the future.