I've toyed with this on the Election Thread and latterly on the Snow one. Here's my position: Is global warming occurring ? Yes , I believe it is , mostly as a result of bounce-back from the last Ice Age. Has anthropogenic / man made activity contributed to this ? Quite possibly , although I believe the extent of this is debatable. Is it a sensible thing to look for alternative to "dirty" fuels ? Eminently so. Should we seek to protect animal / plant life from the ill-effects of industrialisation / human activity - of course. My contention is very much based around the extent to which any debate on the subject has been sidelined by the lobby that takes anthropogenic global warming as an absolute given and seeks to stifle any debate to the contrary.The label of "denier" is applied to those that would take an opposing view .This article here discusses the attempts by some to equate Climate change denial with holocaust denial -http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change_denial Similarly , it appears that the proponents of AGW have adjusted findings and apparently hidden e mails and other evidence to the contrary , at least if you believe the view of this blogger - http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/author/jamesdelingpole/ ( It's a Daily Telegraph blog , and Delingpole is a terrible right-wing shill on most subjects but he does point out some aspects of the debate that are not otherwise covered in most arenas ). I'd be interested to hear the views of tmp'ers on this , particularly those with a scientific background. MoominDave has posted eloquently in support of the consensus behind global warming / climate change in the snow thread, and rightly points out that the science is complex .As I have said in reply to him , my argument is not so much with the original concept but with the way in which the subsequent debate / argument has been managed in the media. What's your view ?