[lg]

> Perhaps global warming produces net long term benefits to humankind.

we know the costs of sea level rise: mass displacement of hundreds of millions of people and the destruction of the world's most productive economic centers. there is already a drying trend in the central plains and other large areas of arable land; more warming will lead to mass starvation. The overall consequence is the destruction of most of the world's wealth. but sure, maybe after all that, everything will be better. by the same token maybe a nuclear war will improve things?

[riprowan]

It's entirely possible that everything you say is true, however, the jeering tone and sweeping generalizations are the opposite of the sort of polite, rational discourse that seems to be constantly missing in these discussions.

[lg]

i don't see what's irrational about it. as for polite, excuse me, whether we're warming the earth is an issue that has been discussed quietly and politely for 30 years and evidence for disaster piles up and up. when polio was raging we did not need polite discussion of whether the germ theory of disease is true, the evidence is in and let's get on with it. but mysteriously on this issue where there are powerful economic interests invested in denial, people just want to discuss and discuss and (by the way) do nothing until discussion is over.