If this is the worst, you must not have read very many :) This is basically a nice collection of the arguments of the anti-global-warming crowd, not that well

If this is the worst, you must not have read very many :) This is basically a nice collection of the arguments of the anti-global-warming crowd, not that well structured or anything but worth flipping through the slides at least. I LOL'd at page 77, the trend-graph of seawater rise projections. I doubt there is the evidence to support the twin claims that 1) a program of some sort could change the temperature trend and 2) humans would benefit from changing it. I suspect that to the extent that humans have changed global trends, a large portion of it has to do with water vapor from our vast increase in agricultural irrigation and diversion. It is probably not possible to address that without starving a lot of people. In fact, I think that inspite of any warming effect, we probably should be increasing the amount of water diversion and storage. If the water that is currently washing away whole towns in Australia could be stored somewhere or diverted into the desert, the payoff in world food prices and economy would be large. Those are the types of huge projects that typically can only be done by national or even international organizations, and if everyone is meeting in Copenhagen or whereever to discuss huge amounts of international money, that's what they should be talking about.