Global Warming on TV :}

I'm very excited because this week DR2 (one of the 2 national TV channels in Denmark) will give a program called:
The Great Global Warming Swindle
http://www.greatglobalwarmingswindle.co.uk/

I'm always skeptical about theories that get out of the scientific circles and become argument of political discussion... usually the result is a sad polarization of the ideas contained in these theories. Everything is simplified into slogans and repeated to infinity.

I admit reading Cricton's "State of fear" with a kind of relief: finally someone was trying to show a different point of view.
It doesn't matter if it is only a novel, I like having a choice, and after all science is about coming out with counter-intuitive theories, then test away the "wrong" ones... so I feel bad when there is a single, strong idea (meme if you like) taking over, always being presented as "that's how things are".
Well, "State of fear" hinted at a refreshing possibility that we still don't know "how things are" and that we (humans) have been wrong so many times before, and in so many ways, that perhaps we should think a bit more before committing totally to a single simplistic solution.

In previous posts I also mentioned Lomborg, because he makes a very interesting argument to me: he accepts all the "standard" points about the global warming, and even that it is our fault. Still he concludes that there are many more options than putting a cork in our collective butt :>
Instead of strangling the economy and our energy needs to produce less (and eventually less C02), why not investing in research, to develop better (and even existing) technologies, that can provide energy AND produce less CO2?!

After all: when I was a kid, in the 70es every other movie and tv program was about how the human race was going to nuke the planet, and how the nuclear winter was going to kill all life forms (think: Planet of the apes II). Didn't happen.
Then they came out with ecology: we humans are killing the planet with pollution, consuming forests and eating entire species to extinction. Well, at least in the west, we have less pollution than in the 70es, we learned to re-plant our forests and
plenty of local and global agencies try to help endangered species (think: Soylent green). So also this catastrophe did not happen.
Then there was the hole in the ozone layer: my physics prof. in my first year of university (1991) once told us that he had been in antartica to measure the damn thing... and he personally found nothing at all. According to the reading of his instruments there was no hole!
I think that was one of those things that make you think.
What if? What if it was a big practical joke?
But I'm not a "conspiracy theory" fan, so I limit myself to this thought: it must be so fucking difficult to establish a scientific truth. Even a stupid thing like gravity (a generalization of "everyone falls on his/her ass"!) took millenia to perfect, from aristotele's impetus, to Galileo and Newton.

So: what do we REALLY know about global warming? ;D