I think there's a lot more economic politics involved in global warming than in ID. While global warming itself seems to be undeniable, the cause of global warming is still debatable.<quoted text>
Let me guess,
'The planet has always changed climate'- irrelevant
'Its all a tax scamming conspiracy'- so tax on tobacco proves it doesn't cause cancer
'CO2 is minute proportion of atmosphere'- irrelevant
'Its the sun'- look up warming of troposphere and stratosphere
I do wonder if the arguments against AGW in a few decades will be viewed in the same ways as the arguments against ToE - I.e. scientifically illiterate
There is still a significant portion of "old technology" that sees their share of the economic pie as being threatened, and much of "new technology" that is competing for that same pie share. They both hire legions of lawyers and scientists to offset the other's evidence. It seems that objective science is leaning towards new technology, but there is also gross oversimplification on both sides.