High School Teacher's Global Warming Video a YouTube Hit

The problem with that presentation is that the worst case scenario might well be in column A.
We know quiet a bit about the costs of acting the way environmentalists want now. Also the current science though says we are talking about 1-2 degrees of warming created by human activity over a 100 year period, the rest by natural, cyclical forces.

Instead of upsetting the global economy needlessly, we should spend more on research, both on things like nuclear fusion and getting a better understanding of the ecosystems.
We should also spend more on preparing. Build flood defences in places like Bangladesh for a start.

Acting in accordance with the environmentalists in Greenpeace and others just risks making it worse.

Can everyone just step back and very objectively ask yourself just one common sense, logical question?

Who, on this planet, is 'qualified' to say that the climate is NOT supposed to be changing like it is?

To even begin with this guy's discussion, you have to adopt the extremely arrogant position of the climate is not supposed to change. Who knows this? If human generated CO2 is so awful, why do trees and plants need it grow and therefore feed us? We exhale CO2. Are we supposed to stop breathing to help the environment? Is murder now environmentally friendly? How much CO2 is the earth supposed to generate on its own? Who can measure it? So humans, living their lives, have more effect on global climate than say....I don't know....the sun?...precipitation?...wind patterns?...volcano erruptions?....hurricanes?

Human caused global warming is a BIG FAT LIE!!! Slick tongued politicians came up with the whole scheme to make themselves feel important and dip into your pockets. Wake up people!!!

Bloody hell. There are so many problems with this I don't know where to begin. I'll really try to be brief, though.

Problem 1: He suggests merely one way to tackle a problem, then spends nine and a half b.o.r.i.n.g minutes avoiding the issue entirely, while trying to make us believe he's guiding us to an actual conclusion. "This is how my approach works in the example of the global warming debate" does not by itself help me make up my mind on questions surrounding global warming. Real solutions begin where methodology ends and direct confrontation of a problem begins. Methodology alone does not take us where we need to go.

Problem 2: This man is a science teacher. Why does he want to avoid talking about science? He is one of the reasons American children are growing up so damned stupid.

Problem 3: His cute diagram can be put to work in the service of any goal whatsoever - for example, to persuade the world that Scientology is credible, and that we should all believe the evil Xenu and clusters of alien thetans are responsible for our horrible, empty lives. It can also be used to make a case for torture: immoral, politically necessary, or just really, really fun? It can even be used to make his opinion look stupid by making the "global warming hoax" argument seem compelling.

Problem 4: This dude's attempt to seem impartial is disingenuous in the extreme. If he were truly impartial, his prologue would emphasise self-education on the subject, and skepticism of both sides of the question. But he doesn't, of course, because anthropogenic global warming is, for him, an incontrovertible fact. So is the idea that something can be done to reverse the process. But he doesn't want to tell us that. He does, however, tell us blithely to "spread the word" to "change public policy."

Problem 5: Which public policies should be changed? What should these policies look like after this change has happened? Which measures should be taken to redress our evil deeds against Mother Earth? Assuming we will be encouraged to employ the precautionary principal in place of thinking for ourselves, which agency, government, or fringe interest gets to decide the terms in the columns and rows in our diagram?

Problem 5: The probability of Catastrophe A and Catastrophe B is not equal.

Problem 6: I hate his hair, and I bet he's a vegetarian.

I could say a lot more, but I don't want to subtract another boring nine and half minutes from your life.

Do you suppose the dinosaurs caused the first ice age? You don't mess with mother nature. God created this world and he will do what he see's fit regardless of man. I agree we can help with the pollution, but not to the point that good old Al Gore says, he just jumped on the band wagon so he could make millions, look at his house, do you think 'he' really cares?