Global Warming

Global warming is a sensitive issue. To some it evokes pictures of necessary immediate action while to others it means a vastly overrated hoax. Either way it's an important issue in the public eye. Gore's An Inconvenient Truth poses interesting facts that are easily debatable but provide a striking view of the subject. Although most of his arguments possess more holes in it than a sieve. His arguments hit home and this is why his story has gained so much ground. While I personally don't really consider myself on the global warming bandwagon I can't deny it's persuasiveness. What really is the harm in prevention? As Gregg Easterbrook says in his article Some Convenient Truths' most plans to reduce pollution and correct human wrongs done on the planet have been relatively cost efficient and have provided us with little economic or personal sacrifice. To say no to a prevention plan that has no personal or national effect almost seems like taking an unnecessary risk. It kind of reminds me of a religious outlook that some people hold. That the implications of believing in god us to heaven while not believing lead us to hell. So if we believe then we have something to gain but nothing to lose while if we don't believe we have heaven to lose and nothing to gain. As opposed to the proverbial win-win or lose-lose situation it's a win-null situation versus a lose-null situation. Which would you rather have?