The problem is that global warming is too large a subject to be distilled down for debate. It's like cancer. Can one cure cancer? Maybe, but not in one blow. Ev

The problem is that global warming is too large a subject to be distilled down for debate. It's like cancer. Can one cure cancer? Maybe, but not in one blow. Even discussing something like breast cancer versus colon cancer is practically discussing apples versus oranges. The same for global warming: discussing the hole in the ozone layer versus acid rain versus rising temperatures versus melting polar ice caps doesn't feel like you're talking about anything that fits comfortably under the umbrella of "global warming" or even "climate change". That is to say, the concept of "climate change" is a PR disaster that desparately needs its conversation redefined.