While I don’t think we’ll settle the facts around global warming here in this blog(!), I have to say that by spending time in a couple other countries, one can see how the issue is not framed as a political polemic there–rather as a kind of accepted non-ideological public safety issue (eg along the lines of say, how to prevent forest fires, how to make buildings safer etc.). The reason, I think, is that there is no vested interest/intensely political counterpoint dedicated to trying desperately to “fight” the facts behind the phenomenon. There may be, and are disagreements about possible *solutions*–eg, how much market, how much government action, etc., based on one’s view of the role of government, political philosophies, and practical concerns but there is NO debate (or let’s say 99.999% none!) on the fact that it is occurring, man-made, and requires action.

Unfortunately, the U.S. is in something of an informational bubble when it comes to climate change. Almost as if we were a country publicizing the views of those who were trying for their own purposes to fight the notion that “cigarette smoking causes cancer” as we continued to make cigarettes, our people got sicker, and the rest of the world was working on prevention.

Conservation of non-renewable resources is vital. Understanding mankind’s effect on the environment is vital, and we need to minimize our assault on same. A global tax on fossil fuels is a solution that makes sense, because we’re all in the world together, and it will achieve these goals. But rather than try to sell this on its merits, they’ve invented an urgent crisis. It’s hard not to look at it in this light after having watched Al Gore himself make the statement I’ve quoted above.

Of course, we all hear TV and papers decrying the global warming, while other sources Republicans are exposed to present another side and other stats. Dems are pretty much accepting as it reinforces their preconceived ideas, and they do not question facts, but accept the mantra.

So the Republican view represents broader thinking, insights and perspectives, not just taking what traditional media throws at us.

PS. I remember as a kid in the 50s-60s, living in a home without AC and subjected to the unbeleivably hot weather at times in the Midwest, where I could not get to sleep all night. Was that a result of global warming?

One possible theory: more highly educated Republicans are more likely to hold higher positions in business or politics, and are therefore more interested in holding the “right” party view of skepticism

Obviously, all this is based on the position that human induced climate change, if you really study the countless credible research and reports, is a near virtual certainty. (And the only reason we need to say “virtual” is that nothing in science–not even the statement that the Sun will rise tomorrow–can be stated with 100% probability, only probabilities)