I will say: I don't think he's making an invalid point when he says "There's a lot of evidence, but global warming encompasses a lot of complicated points: Is it happening? Did we cause it? Is it bad? Can we fix it? Is government-forced conservation the only way to fix it?" ... I certainly haven't seen "scientific consensus" lined up behind the answers to any of these questions except the first one, which I believe he's using as an anchor.
[...]
.............
Sure, that sounds right.
But I think those other questions -- the ones beyond "is it happening?" -- are best answered by policy we're only getting in half-assed form and via engineering projects which should be global in scope but which are now mostly scattered and uncoordinated.
At least one scientist has tried to address this:
Sustainable Energy - Without the Hot Air
<http://www.withouthotair.com/>
Jordan again:
So really, he's just the wrong person to ask; because his approach is to criticise the stupid-low-hanging-fruit rather than give a balanced reading of all the points. Hey, he's a (great) magician and a (pretty good, sometimes) comedian; who gives a fuck what he thinks about global warming?
Least of all: him.
..........
Yup.
.d.