Deleted

Long term weather prediction is very complex.  Freeman Dyson, a renowned mathematical physicist at the Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton wrote:

My first heresy says that all the fuss about global warming is grossly exaggerated. Here I am opposing the holy brotherhood of climate model experts and the crowd of deluded citizens who believe the numbers predicted by the computer models. Of course, they say, I have no degree in meteorology and I am therefore not qualified to speak. But I have studied the climate models and I know what they can do. The models solve the equations of fluid dynamics, and they do a very good job of describing the fluid motions of the atmosphere and the oceans. They do a very poor job of describing the clouds, the dust, the chemistry and the biology of fields and farms and forests. They do not begin to describe the real world that we live in. The real world is muddy and messy and full of things that we do not yet understand. It is much easier for a scientist to sit in an air-conditioned building and run computer models, than to put on winter clothes and measure what is really happening outside in the swamps and the clouds.  

I'd go a little further. Navier-Stokes equations do describe fluid motion, certainly in the short run in the atmosphere. These equations don't do a great job of long term prediction.

In terms of mechanism. C02 is certainly does not absorb visible light. It does absorb in three narrow bands infra-red radiation. So it is an infr-red absorber albeit a limited one. It is also a trace element in the atmosphere.  To justify this trace element as a mechanism for Global Warming, the claim is that somehow this trace element causes water vapor (which is a better infr-red absorber) to increase its absorption of infra-red.   It is not a convincing claim in my view.

If our political leaders believe that they can regulate the output of  a natural by product of human and animal respiration, a gas that is disolved throught the oceans they are sorely mistaken. The net result will be economic distuption with minimal or no benefit.

Revkin is correct. A media obsessed with dramatic "stories" is utterly incapable of serious coverage.  Dilettantes in the news media may end up costing the US Economy trillions of dollars in lost production.

"...it deserves a more prominent place in the media."

Hell, how can it be any more prominent? It has permeated everywhere - even in stories and shows that aren't about Global Warming. National Geographic Channel has just about worked it into their "Gangland" series.

<However, he indicated their focus should be on "energy options.>

Such as windmills, solar panels and "fantasy fuels" which don't work?  How about we stop listening to the envirosocialist dorks with lots of time on their hands who offer so-called solutions which always make things worse?  I'd bet that most of these misfits "don't work" either.

<"If we're serious about the problem, we'll do much more.">

Yep.  We'll start drilling offshore, up in Anwar, or anywhere else on real estate that is ours for the crude oil that we need. We'll uncap the hundreds of oil wells in Texas (I believe it was there)and elsewhere and start making our gasoline. It's right there under our feet, and we can't get it because we allowed the likes of the Sierra Club et al,  to set policy. Sorry guys, but conservation and abstinance from using energy just doesn't cut it. 

 Next, we'll start building some new oil refineries, our own, which would not only use our own crude but would create real jobs, not government subsidized jobs, but real jobs in the private sector.

Finally, we need to get over the silly, irrational fear of nuclear power plants.  We haven't built a new on since the mid 1970s and we need them more now than ever.

And, of course, before all that happens, we need to find public leaders and politicians who have the guts and common sense to implement all of this.

Apparently, The Weather Channel owner wanting to sue Algore for fraud IS news. Too bad the MSM will make him look even crazier than Al. *sigh* Hopefully it will make a few more people aware the Algore is just trying to make money. "I have the SUN in my pocket" yeah, the check's in the mail, love the new 'do. right.

I used to think Andrew Revkin was a smart man.  I've come to realize he is the opposite of smart.