I think Sarah Palin is closer to the truth on this one than Al Gore is. In other words, I think she is correct that human-based activities are not a primary factor in climate change, and that cyclical events in Nature are the primary factor, while human-based activities are a much secondary factor.

To support Al Gore's particular views on climate change is simply to parrot a popular cause that has become a holy gospel to the Left and the "liberal" intelligentsia, to the extent that they will personally attack and ridicule anyone who doesn't repeat that gospel as a mantra, and they'll do it with the same hungry zeal shown by people in Salem who hunted around for witches back when people were burning witches.

This does not impress me with either the honesty or the impartiality of many people who imagine themselves to be good, clear-thinking "liberals". It seems more like the self-righteous raving of a group of religious fanatics against "the unbelievers" than the comments of people who actually wish to talk in a useful way about something.

I might add that in a general sense I am "liberal". I'm also a Leftist in a general sense. And I like Al Gore in a general sense and I regard Sarah Palin's political stance on most things as way off the beam.

So it is not knee-jerk loyalty to some pre-arranged set of political assumptions that lies behind my opinion of her opinion of climate change. It's my own independent perspective on the matter, period.