http://www.gallup.com/poll/125849/Hawaii-Tops-U…

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/02/15/world…

Can we all stop with “the science is settled” and “the debate is over” and “head-in-the-sand” comments now please?

http://www.hydroponicswholesale.com

You're not doing your argument much good by making blanket statements in a tone of ridicule. It's one thing to debate the issues, causes and potential solutions, but castigating the citizenry of entire states as ignorant, backward, religious fundamentalists and whack-jobs says more that you're lacking in substance.

I do have a couple of questions for you though:

1. Have you been to Utah or studied much about the state? Yes, it's population is predominantly conservative in its political views. Yes, there is a majority of one particular religion that is often misunderstood or disregarded as “fundamentalist whack-jobs”.

Did you know that Harry Reid, the Senate Majority Leader and supporter of Cap and Trade and all things environmental is one of those “fundamentalist whack-jobs”?

What about Philo Farnsworth, inventor of the first fully electronic television as well as a nuclear fusion device? Yep, he was one of those backward “fundamentalist whack-jobs” from Utah.

Did you know that the University of Utah has one of the top business schools in the nation? That's tough to do when you're “backward”.

Did you know that Utah is often called the second “silicon valley” because of its technological development? Pretty impressive for some backward folks.

Did you know that Utah has been rated #1 in the nation three years in a row for financial management? Not bad for some “backward” people. It would be nice to see a 'sophisticated' state like California do that!

Did you know that technology for capturing wind-generated energy in the form of compressed air will be implemented in Utah, making wind power a more viable large-scale option? Still backward?

How about the first successful implant of an artificial heart? Yep, backward Utah inventors and surgeons pulled that off. How DO these backward people do it? It's a wonder they can even dress themselves!

The point is, trying to paint a broad brushstroke of “ignorance” across the citizens of an entire state because their political views differ from yours challenges the credibility of any of your other statements.

2. If I understand your comment, there are “Exxon-funded scientists” that are not to be trusted because they have questionable motives. Now can you understand how some of us might question government-funded scientists and their motives? Should we trust governments and some corporations (and their scientists) and not others? If so, which ones?

3. Did all 4,000 IPCC scientists perform independent studies, using their own methods and all come to similar, independent conclusions? Or did a few teams of scientists perform the studies, take the measurements in the field, publish their findings and then win support from the scientific community that trusts them?

The fact that the IPCC has had to backtrack on things (like glacial melting in the Himalayas), and that original data is missing so it can't be re-examined, and that questionable data and practices have come to light (the whole “climate-gate” event) at the very least casts a shadow of doubt as to the trustworthiness of *some* of the scientists and governmental boards. Is it ignorant to acknowledge these things?

All of these things aside, do you really think that global warming can be solved through taxes and carbon credits? That governments are trustworthy enough to manage this without corruption? That the proposed solutions will actually work? Have you considered the potential negative consequences of governments having such power? Or the effect on already strained economies?

Being skeptical of the severity of and proposed political solutions to global warming does not mean that I want everyone to go around polluting. When I see trash on the ground, I pick it up. I recycle, I and carry my groceries home in reusable bags. I drive a compact, fuel-efficient car. I hope to have cost-effective solar technology some day to supplement or replace the power in my home. I want corporations to be responsible in their disposal of toxic materials. I want to breathe clean air. I think that (barring emergence of some altogether new technology) electric cars are the best alternative to fossil fuel vehicles because it separates the source of the power from the use of the power, allowing people to drive zero point-of-use emission vehicles while cleaner technologies are developed to provide the power that charges them.

Do these things make me backward? Or is it just that I lack your trust in government? Or that I think there are millions more lives that can be saved NOW from hunger and disease than through action that will *hopefully* have some effect in coming decades? If so, maybe backward isn't so bad…