Regarding the issue of global warning, which response best reflects your thinking?
#	Response Date	Comment
1.	Mon, 4/16/07 7:29 PM	There are some no-brainers, like reducing use of foreign oil (that's a twofer) and using more wind and nuclear power, that we could and should do.
2.	Sun, 5/6/07 11:47 AM	This is a catastrophic change that should provoke, but will not, immediate and drastic changes in energy consumption.
3.	Sun, 5/6/07 1:58 PM	God is in control and we are foolish to think we can change the world.
4.	Sun, 5/6/07 2:27 PM	Until science concurs that this is NOT "part of the natural ebb and flow of nature" I remain very unconvinced!
5.	Sun, 5/6/07 4:08 PM	we still should avoid pollution of waters and air...to make the world more liveable...but the "warming" going on is a natural flow...caused more by ocean currents etc. than human contamination...
6.	Sun, 5/6/07 8:50 PM	We certainly should hedge our bets by taking some steps although it may well be natural ebb and flow.
7.	Sun, 5/6/07 10:44 PM	Conservation is always a positive step, however Al Gore has hyped global warming to such an extent that it is impossible to converse with his cool aid drinkers. If global warming is the threat that Al G makes it out to be why doesn't he take steps to reduce his own carbon footprint. Carbon credits purchased from his own company leaves something to be desired.
8.	Wed, 5/23/07 7:13 PM	This is part of the natural ebb and flow of nature, however, we on earth can effect a slowing of this problem by our actions and our decisions.