FACTS VS ASSUMPTIONS

I just watched "Supper Club", hosted by Tom Bergeron on the new Planet Green TV series.

As usual, the talk turned to Global Warming. After some discussion, guest Catherine Oxenburg wondered why, if Global Warming was a 'hysteria' over a manufactured crisis, are the poles melting; polar bears now on the endangered species list?

As I've said, I'm all for not destroying the Earth, but it's obvious Ms. Oxenburg hasn't done any homework or she would know that the polar ice-caps on Mars are also melting and that there are many, many more polar bears in the Artic as in recent history.

The scientific community is at odds over the very existence of global warming and, even assuming we ARE in a warming, the causation and impact thereof. Ms. Oxenburg's questions illustrate the sad willingness of people to jump on and support a movement without serious and intellectually honest debate.

Moral of this story? The jury is still out, no matter what Gore (energy-sucker extraodinaire) says. And destroying the economy of the US is not going to help the Earth in any way, shape or form, regardless of what Earthly problem is at hand.