Scientists Against Scientific Consensus

A little more on the "settled" science of global warming, and the universal consensus among the scientific community. I found a link from Glenn Beck to a site where scientists can sign their skepticism of global warming. Apparently 31,000 have signed. They also have a 12 page letter outlining their position.

One big argument that I often hear (even from John McCain) is that true or false what harm is there in reducing our greenhouse carbon output. I will admit there are many goods that come from increasing MPG in cars, switching to some renewable cleaner fuels to improve air quality, conservation to lower out of pocket costs for home energy. But the steps outlined by Kyoto, or subsequent meetings would devastate our economy. Fuel, Food, and luxuries would be so outrageously expensive only the "rich" would be able to afford them. Pretty much all economic progress made over the last 100 years would be undone. And frankly I don't even know what the goal is. Do we want Global cooling? Seems like I remember in the 80's that we were heading for an ice age. Do we want to maintain the current temperature? To that all I have to say is: ENTROPY. Energy required to maintain anything in nature has to be equal to the forces moving to greater randomness. The biggest question is then are in positive or negative feedback. and here