Why can't we get past the question if and why - and on to the more important question, now what? There is little science that I've seen showing that anything we do will change things. Perhaps we are past the tipping point and just have to ride out the results. The economic costs of stopping CO2 emission are very high - and there is no guarantee it will do any good. Why not invest billions in fixing whatever climate change brings. Perhaps a carbon tax could go towards this, but my fear is global corruption will take control of this and we'll all get screwed.

Brazil's market stock has a "kill switch" that turns off trading in cases such as these. If the stocks take a nose dive because of a computer glitch or
because of a human typo, the kill switch automatically closes the market for that day.

That would be a great feature to add to our stock markets here in the US.

They get away with it because of the extreme polarisation of opinions. If i write up an article detailing how the atmosphere will balloon and aerobreak the moon down on our heads because of man made CO2 sources then i'll get immideate support from the CO2=Bad crowd, atleast from the journalist and non-scientist segment of the crowd even though the science behind the argument is fraudulent. That it have turned into a political alignment instead of science is my main problem with it.
My secondary problem is the hubris of the climate modellers, predicting there will be rain in 12 hours or snow this winter is at best guesstimations, yet people tout their multi decade global predictions as for sure to be really accurate and a reason to ACT NOW because in twenty years it will be too late, never mind waiting five years to see if the model have any accuracy. And if we do wait five years we'll have the new and shiny and untested climate model 5.0 which more accurately reflected the last five years as an indicator of increased accuracy yet still is untested for predicting real future.

There's still the sticky matter of intent. Those emails make the intent clear. Now, maybe the people in question cooled down after the heat of the moment and didn't carry through on their threats. Or maybe they did, but failed due to obstacles in their path. We don't know from the emails, but it's showing more of that blatant and emotional anti-scientific bias that colored their thinking and probably their research.

Maybe it's because greedy capitalists price everything twice as high as it's actually worth...

The cable companies are the ones that have to change. They may lose all their media business and be stuck just pumping bits through their Internet tubes. I get my phone from Vonage, and many movies from Roku/Netflix. That is just the start of where things are headed. The concept of broadcasting at a specific time, and having schedules is becoming quite quaint. The cable companies can compete for a piece of mny content dollar just like any company connected to the Internet. They may have attractive bundles that makes it worth while, but their current business model is headed out the door.

If you have ever touched one of their Web sites and caught their cookie, your tracks can be followed into unexpected places. This data is a gold mine for them, if they can figure out how to sell it without pissing off users with how much they know.

When I bought my ROKU, I was just about to purchase HBO from Time Warner because I couldn't find anything good to watch on TV. Granted, ROKU/Netflix has a limited selection, but its enough to get by. As content gets better and the masses start going to steaming video, the cable companies get positioned as bit slingers and cut out of the middle of the content cash flow. I'm all for that after the high subscription fees I've paid for crap, but Time Warner, Comcast, Verizon and others are not going to stand for this attack on their revenue streams. Not only do they lose premium subscription revenue, but the streaming is going to consume way more of their bandwidth - especially as better quality HD becomes available. The cable companies will shape the bandwidth or start charging by the gigabit, and that is just a start. Their model is to attack by creating regulations that favor their business model - and that will slow down Netflix and others.

I'm already suspecting Time Warner of shaping ROKU/Netflix traffic. My ROKU/Netflix movies start out at "four dot" quality and quickly shift to "two dot" quality - with the ROKU reporting 0.5 megabits/second throughput at the same time my PC can get 5-7 megabits/second to various speed test sites. ROKU is unusable until the throughput issue is fixed - but neither ROKU, Netflix or Time Warner has determined what the problem is.

They gotta do what they gotta do. The problem is, a claim of probable cause by the border patrol is tainted when they find something that is not border related. It should be a free pass if your special crime is not directly related to their duties. States do not need the feds acting as their cops, beyond that special airport zone. Isn't that partly what started the last civil war?