If we reduce "greenhouse gases" does that mean that the earth will start into a cooling trend?

Petrolium products do not cause acid rain, we have made great strides in cleaning the exaust from coal, natural gas and petro products.

Why pay 3-5 times for for other sources of energy that are less efficient and will take a serious economic toll?

The article has more than one scientist otherwise I would not have posted a link.

Glaciers have been melting since the last ice age Dan. The environment is cyclical.

I see no reason to seriously curtail use of any fuels until there is a good alternative.

Monk,

What level of human caused warming do you think there is a "concensus" on?

The predictions of temp and sea level changes keep dropping with each new IPCC report.

Discoveries of unconventional sources of oil grow yearly, increasing known supplies of oil. The unconventional sources have higher recovery costs associated with them, but with current technology and disregarding cost of recovery, and assuming a 2% per year growth in demand, there are current sufficient known reserves of conventional oil, heavy oil, tar sand and shale oil to sustain oil comsumption for another 50 years. Known world reserves are increasing almost every year and the known reserves/production ratio also increases yearly, so the world can presumably sustain current consumption + 2% per annum almost indefinately.

I prepared my senior paper for my Economics degree on this subject in 1995. Although a bit dated (although not as dated as my research), this source comes to the same conclusion:

http://archive.greenpeace.org/climate/a ... serve.html

Enviromental depletion alarmists fall victim to the Malthusian fallacy.