Many people are sounding the alarm about the use of fossil fuels on the argument that the CO2 they emit will cause catastrophic global warming, even a tipping point near 400 ppm total atmospheric concentration. We are near 400 ppm, 0.04%, now. There has been practically no global warming since 2000, in spite of significant increased use of fossil fuels. Others say that CO2 from fossil fuels is a small part of atmospheric greenhouse gasses and that drastic actions like stopping use of fossil fuels, carbon cap and trade, carbon capture and sequestration would be catastrophic for people who are suffering because of lack of electricity. This article by Yehoshua Socol in Israel and Moshe Yanovskiy in Russia asks the question: "Is global warming argument good for nuclear industry?" It is a very important question for deciding how to promote nuclear power.
Sherwood Idso & Craig Idso - A critique of the 26 April 2007 testimony of James E. Hansen made to the Select Committee of Energy Independence and Global Warming of the United States House of Representatives entitled “Dangerous Human-Made Interference with Climate”
Gerald Marsh - Contrary to the conventional wisdom of the day, the real danger facing humanity is not global warming, but more likely the coming of a new Ice Age.
Gerald Marsh - According to the 2007 IPCC Summary for Policymakers, essentially all of the anthropogenic radiative forcing since 1750 is due to the increase in carbon dioxide concentration. This means that if the sun is responsible for 36-50% of the temperature rise since 1900, the IPCC is using too large a value for its coefficient relating radiative forcing to changes in carbon dioxide concentration. This is important because a smaller value of α reduces the sensitivity of the earth’s climate to increases in carbon dioxide concentrations—a result that has significant policy implications.