No, I'm not going to start and end with the fact we've had the coldest winter or most snow in decades in various parts of the world.

I'm going to go where no human secularist would ever go.

That's right: God

I believe He will have more say in what happens to Earth than all of us combined.

Should we be actively polluting? No. Should we be good stewards of the earth. Yes. Should we use things in moderation and avoid excesses? Of course.

For just as many claims that humans are responsible for global warming, there are studies where the facts point towards the sun. There is just as much evidence we might be in a cooling period as there is saying we're in an ongoing warming period.

In other words, real scientists are in disagreement. The argument isn't over.

As it is, it's moot. If the relatively small amount of carbon dioxide we produce is truly enough to push everything out of whack, then we would have to reduce all of it in order to bring it back into whack--and no one is proposing we get rid of all our carbon dioxide emissions.

I've seen the video where the guy comes to the inescapable conclusion that we should go ahead and spend money on saving the planet, human-induced global warming or not, because of the fact that the other options are just too horrible to contemplate.

So, I wonder if India and China got the memo and what their plans are, considering they both have a few times more the people than we do. Who's going to make them reverse course on burgeoning economies while we essentially lay waste to ours? All in the name of being responsible?

Again, I don't think we should lay waste to entire forests for the sake of profit, and I don't think we should use up all our resources. I think there should be alternative forms of energy developed. Energy consumption isn't going to solve our entire dependency on foreign oil, nor would it solve a global warming threat, because we still rely on plastic derivatives and rubber products too much--all of which are petroleum based products. What's going to be the plastic substitute? Hardened air?

God has plans for the planet, and our polluting and our wars will pale in comparison. We should be good stewards for our own sakes, not because the planet will die if we don't. God won't let that happen. As I said, He has his own plans. Our job is to know the plan and follow it. Not get hyped up and freaked out about something we're not causing and couldn't control, anyway.

Unless someone out there has a way of combating weather systems and climate changes. Maybe they can put it to good use, then, the next time a blizzard paralyzes the northeast or the midwest, or a hurricane pummels Florida and the Gulf Coast.

Otherwise, I think we should be considering how we stop funding global jihad with any of our oil money going to the Middle East--even Saudi Arabia--and we come up with cheaper ways to produce more energy so we can out compete in the global economy.

There's an ad running on this site that says something to the effect, "What could be more conservative than conservation?"

I didn't click on it or read any more of it, but it did get me to thinking.

There is plenty that a conservative can like about getting off of foreign oil, even if most of ours comes from nations we're friends with. Given the nature of the Middle East, and the fact that so much oil is shipped around the world from there, it has become such the foreign policy issue that even Republicans have been talking about energy policies which include nuclear power, biodiesel and other green technologies.

When they talk about it in the context of global warning, most of us who are conservative start cringing and get very wary. But when they talk about it in terms of preventing our gas money from getting into the hands of terrorists, of creating cheaper and more efficient energy sources, I can't think of anything I would enjoy more.

As long as it doesn't derail the US economy in the process.

Petroleum products are in everything we do. It's not just about the energy. Plastics and all of their derivatives are involved, too. You can't go far without finding something that once came from petroleum. And just reducing pollution from cars is not going to do enough.

I have seen enough scientific evidence regarding climate change or global warming to question the level of man's role in any increases in temperature. Especially anything over the polar ice caps. There's just as much evidence to point towards an increase in solar activity being responsible than there is from relatively negligible carbon dioxide emissions.

That's not to say we should not push for more efficiency in our vehicles. A new German made car called the Loremo sports 150 miles to the gallon, and it looks straight out of I, Robot or Minority Report, even if it is minimalist on the inside and in power. I've always wondered, outside of any speed demon desire I might harbor as a male, why a street vehicle needs to propel itself from 0-60 in 3.5 seconds. This one might take four times as long to accelerate, but it still will go the speed limit on the highway.

Last week there were youtube postings of a man who was able to ignite salt water using radio waves. We're talking a high burning flame capable of theoretically powering all kinds of things. Salt water is everywhere and renewable. It would be a great power source.

I don't think we need to spend exorbitant amounts on energy. I don't think we need to consume excessive amounts either. We should be good stewards of this earth.

You don't need to be a card carrying member of PETA, or hug trees or worship the earth rather than God to want clean, renewable energy. It does have to be done right. If car companies or some other energy driven industry starts developing and mass producing products that run off more efficient and cheap energy sources, they will sell. The government doesn't need to subsidize or fund it. And liberals will not be the only ones who get all over it.