It's REALLY hard to take a stand when everything is so CONFLICTED. From The New American (a publication I know nothing about):
We have more than 22,000 scientist signers of our global-warming petition who’ve looked at the issue and concluded essentially the opposite of these United Nations people. This says nothing about the science. Science does not depend on polling. Just because we have 22,000, and the UN may have 600, does not matter. The only thing our petition demonstrates is that there is no consensus among scientists in support of the UN claims.
Scientific questions are never settled in this way. Science is about natural truth. The truth doesn’t require any advocate. It stands by itself.
In science, a scientist may discover the truth about something. Then he develops a hypothesis, and the hypothesis is tested by various means. So long as the hypothesis passes experimental tests, it becomes stronger and is further relied upon — unless it fails an experimental test. If it is a very fine hypothesis with wide utility, it may spread throughout the entire scientific community and become part of the basis of scientific knowledge. The process by which this is done is not what is important. The truth is important. Scientific truth is not determined by polling or by convening meetings.
If you like truly understanding the environment, make sure you read that article. I can't stress how important it is to get the entire picture. If you blindly follow a cause that is supposed to be based in reality/science, you better make damn sure you're always questioning your stand. That's the scientific method.
I'm always trying to get the most accurate picture of what is going on around me. True, I blog about sustainable transportation and environmental impacts but I'm always willing to see both sides of the issue. Burning oil to power our cars has more than just climate impact and that's, clearly, still being debated.
QUESTION EVERYTHING or you have NOTHING.