The Tough Issue of Global Warming

This post makes me a bit nervous because I know that the global warming discussion rarely proceeds untethered to other political, moral and religious views. Or to say it differently, who can discuss this current issue without personal bias or unfairly caricaturing opposing views and their proponents?

If you want to get to my point, skip all this smaller type and follow the links to Paul Helm's two Analyses (#9 and #10)

Here is my dilemma: I have two relatives who have vastly greater understanding of the issue than I do (both with PhD's in the "hard" sciences) and much keener interest in the issue than I have. These two men have never (to my knowledge) met in person. As I understand each one's position on Global Warming, the two views are quite divergent - almost diametrically opposite! And both can be pretty passionate and persuasive (I must take them according to their authority to address the subject - not on their use of the evidence because I can't make sense of the hard data). What am I to think or to do?

I have my political leanings (I just preached Sunday from Genesis 1 that God is Pro-Life; this is one of the most important issues in politics today because I think abortion, euthanasia, embryonic stem cell research, etc., seem to be arbitrary suspensions of the "all men are created equal and are endowed with certain, inalienable rights" idea at the base of our country's government), but that should not ruin a fair evaluation.

Please read these two analyses by Paul Helm (a British, Christian philosopher) and post a thought or two. He doesn't have an editor, it seems, so look past the mistakes.

First part:

http://paulhelmsdeep.blogspot.com/2007/12/analysis-9-saving-planet-whats-best-bet.html#links

Second part:

http://paulhelmsdeep.blogspot.com/2008/01/analysis-10-saving-planet-whats-stake.html#links

I welcome your comments and discussion!