I believe "Saint Al" is being misrepresented - he is trying to stop only part of 'global warming' - the percentage that is clearly admitted to be man produced, quite a different thing from trying to stop it all - and doing that will reduce the tendency for global warming to rapidly get out of control - no matter what the cause...

I get the impression that some contributers here, while perhaps not so stupid as to miss the finer points of difference, are deliberately (or perhaps so dumb as to do it unconsciously) trying to muddy the waters so that those who have not yet worked it out for themselves can happily say "It's all too complicated for me - so I'll just keep on the way I am - my little bit won't make any difference!"

I note that the push for all governments to ban incandescent light bulbs is now gaining strength worldwide. There are good arguments for certain uses of incandescent technology in appropriate place - I agree that domestic use in the home is not the best place for them, but incandescents are available for certain uses (such as dimming, projection etc) and in many cases, there is no plug in equivalent, or indeed any appropriate replacement in other technology, such as in colour temperature related applications. 'Halogen' lamps are incandescents too - and will be banned under the current proposals.