Climate change skepticism

Climate change scares me. The thing that scares me most, after climate change, is the terrifying willingness of the media and the public to not believe that humans are causing this problem.

I have started reading a load of climate change skeptic material - ordered a load of books, and reading some blogs (and tracing back to peer-reviewed references, of course).

Starting off with a quick Google of climate change, and the following a couple of links...

In one corner we have people trying to warn us that civilization, as we know it, is doomed unless we make some changes. The plus side of those changes is saving this version of society and tons of flora and fauna. The downside is economical cost, which is likely to be less than that of the recent global financial crisis. Although that was (is) painful for many, it is not as bad as the alternative - and the planet will just carry on.

These people are incredibly passionate about informing the public and policy makers to save the world as we know it. They have websites which are part of the 'establishment' Universities and government departments etc, or contribute to sites like Climate Change Australia "...devoted to the discussion and analysis of issues surrounding climate change."

Whether you agree with them or not, it is easy to see why they are trying to warn us. (No, not to keep jobs - these are perfectly employable people without a climate change gravy train).

In the other corner we have the climate change skeptics. These either deny climate change is happening, or deny that it is our fault.

They are incredibly passionate and articulate as well, (though an interesting difference in the style and tone of their language, see if you notice).

But why are they so passionate about discrediting those worried about climate change? Here is Climategate.com's mission: "...help you in your battle against the Religion of Settled Science to dispute their views on Anthropogenic Global Warming, and in addition, to battle the one-world socialist agenda, which is the movement’s leaders’ real goal."

Eh?

Climate Change Fraud (CCF) ".. is dedicated to debunking, reviewing, and responding to the shrill cries of the media and the global warming zealots who have embraced anthropogenic global warming (AGW) as an eco-religion and not as a scientific endeavor for answers..."

Oh! I see. Now that is clear.

Finally, lets have a look at the 'shrill' cries from those champions of eco-religious, one world socialism global warming zealots, Greenpeace. Their (Aussie) reason for campaigning about climate change:

"The world faces a climate emergency. Australia and the Pacific are at the frontline.

We’re suffering worse bushfires, flash floods and a drought that never seems to end. These are all signs that we’re reaching a tipping point to a climate catastrophe.

It’s clear that ‘business as usual’ is not an option."

Scary, but not exactly shrill.

To recap: In one corner, a bunch of people who want to save the world. In the other, a bunch of people who want to stop us listening to a bunch of people who want to save the world.

Finally, if you haven't already, try reading the book What's the worst that could happen? by Greg Craven. His argument is less about who is right, but more about how to analyse and make a decision 'on balance'.

I'll let you know how I get on with my more thorough research of both sides of the argument. And I want to read more on geo-engineering; anyone point me in the right direction?