A revealing look at how to combat global warming!

I am a regular reader of the magazine Discover. Unfortunately, the magazine is an unwavering believer in global warming. However, in the March issue, Discover asked 4 leading climate experts what should be done to tackle global warming, and their responses were revealing.

First, Robert W. Corell, senior fellow at the American Meteorological Society said that "even if we reduce greenhouse gases, it's going to take 300 to 400 years for the planet's temperature to stabilize." In other words, there is just about nothing we can do...so he says, "we are going to need to adapt."

Second, John Christy, director of the Earth Systems Science Center at the University of Alabama at Huntsville says that "I don't think we would be spending resources wisely by dealing with an issue that we don't know that much about and that we can't really control anyway. I do wholeheartedly support research to find new sources of energy that don't involve buring carbon."

Third, Tom Wigley, senior scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research says that "My opinion is that Kyoto, with its targets and timetables, isn't the right way to go." He wants a giant research project to find new sources of energy.

Lastly, Richard Somerville, professor of Meteorology at the Scripps Insitution of Oceanography says that "we really need a massive cut in greenhouse gases - 60, 70, or 80 percent," and thus also wants more research.

All four experts were thus not that interested in Kyoto, sort of admitted that adaptation is a far better strategy that pouring billions of dollars to lower greenhouse gases, and that the only really viable strategy is to use research and technology to find new sources of energy. So, I ask the question....why are we still talking about Kyoto?