As the G8 seems to be trying to focus on cutting emissions and the like, I’m going to set out my take on climate change, point by point. I imagine it’s different to what most people would expect, what with me being (very vaguely) a centre-left liberal - and I’m genuinely intrigued to know what it is I seem to be missing that makes me go against the current consensus.
Do go and read the whole, well-written and logical post; it pretty much lays out my own position but with more precision and less swearing.
The same can be said for Bishop Hill's deconstruction of the IPCC's dodgy-as-fuck science.
The IPCC's assessment report is said to represent the consensus view of 2500 scientists. Who these scientists are and how they made their happiness with this alleged consensus clear is not known. The comments of reviewers on the draft IPCC reports cannot be reproduced, despite this contravening the IPCC's own rules. The public have to accept the existence of a consensus on trust.
Again, go and read the whole thing and, of course, follow the links.
And, in the name of all that's unholy, is you are a True Believer do the above before you start equating me to a Holocaust denier, OK? You might just look at the evidence and reconsider your position; I know that it's unlikely and that the science may baffle you slightly, but give it a go, do.
You may find that you sleep better at night.