If you're naive enough to think exposing a $2,500 a day oil consultant for having his "global warming" paper underwritten by OPEC is an ad hominem attack, I doubt you'll be interested in anything I have say but this is exactly what the tobacco industry did in the 50s. They paid "scientists" to come to a predetermined conclusion favorable to big tobacco.

I'm going to need the reference on your water vapor example because I don't think that it "always leads to a tipping point." Water vapor isn't a one way street like carbon because water vapor also mitigates the warming phenomenon. Water vapor in the form of clouds, for example, reflect great deal of heat by shading the earth's surface. Heat is absorbed when water changes forms (solid, liquid, gas). All large bodies of water yield a huge evaporative cooling effect.

Look, you're not a climate scientist and neither am I but out of the temperature spectrum of the universe, most rational people would agree that life only flourishes on this planet within a very narrow temperature range. In the scheme of things, it's a razor thin margin and since the industrial revolution, we're pushing the boundary.

It's disturbing the way America, once a leader in science and technology, seems to reject the science now based solely on preconceived political/economic grounds. That may be unprecedented. Is it a coincidence that this is happening during our decline as a world leader? I don't think so.

"Climategate" came to nothing. Nevertheless, you continue to besmirch the people who have dedicated decades of their lives to working this problem and are closer to the subject than a few aileron jockeys, who read an article once, will ever be.

It's interesting that while secretly bemoaning the insincere and disingenuous nature of your own airline managements, you enthusiastically carry the water of management at big oil/gas/coal.