I've got 100 different projects that need done at home (just bought this spring), and havent had time and probably wont have time to read every article posted. So, Ill just say my piece and be done with it. I want you to ask yourselves, how many of these links are independently verified, peer reviewed, replicated information. Several have financial and political backers (most mainstream media does). Several are blogs/opinions and several are mainstream media. That is not a scientific publication.
Someone posted about the % of scientists that agree/disagree with climate change. First, abstracts were reviewed, not entire publications. Second, in most scientific publications, opinion isnt warranted. A scientists job is to collect data, interpret data, share data. And third, even if 66% of scientists did not express opinion, it doesnt mean they disagree with anthropogenic climate influence. And really? A link to "700" scientists that disagree with climate change, yet only 3 dozen or so listed have qualifications that would make them credible. So that would put it at about 1% of scientists? Doesnt sound statistically significant to me. You dont ask a pharmaceutical researcher to build rocket ships. Comparing apples and oranges.
I'm not here to call anyone stupid, I'm sure there is a wealth of knowledge here that I dont have. Think about history. It was claimed that humans cant affect the Earth. So the use of chloroflourocarbons had no affect on the ozone layer? Deforestation has no affect either? Draining of a majority of the US wetlands had no affect? Any time in history there was an controversial discovery, no matter what evidence is presented, there is backlash. When a heliocentric view of our solar system was presented, there was backlash. When black holes were discovered, there was backlash. When the idea of continental drift/plate tectonics was discovered, there was backlash. As the theories that make up the idea of evolution are discovered, there is still backlash. Ask yourself, are you part of the backlash? Or are you going to promote research and technology that ultimately lead to progress and sustainability?
If scientists are wrong (and there is a small chance they are), it will be corrected in time, but only through the collection of new evidence. In the mean time, I dont beleive in anthropogenic climate change, but I do accept the evidence presented so far. I will continue to use fossil fuels because there isnt a better, affordable option.... yet.